New Delhi: The Supreme Court has delivered a significant judgment questioning the National Green Tribunal’s jurisdiction to direct prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in environmental cases.
Supreme Court Challenges NGT’s Power in PMLA Prosecution for Environmental Cases
Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan made critical observations in a civil appeal regarding environmental compensation for groundwater pollution caused by chromium waste storage.
The case involved Waris Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.’s appeal against the orders of the NGT and the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board regarding the assessment of environmental compensation for the storage of hazardous chromium waste in Khan Chandpur village, Rania, Kanpur Dehat.
Fresh Environmental Compensation Assessment Ordered by Supreme Court
The court observed, “There is a serious doubt about the jurisdiction of the NGT to direct prosecution of an individual under the PMLA.” However, the bench chose not to delve deeper into this jurisdictional question as the direction was being set aside on other grounds.
In addressing the computation of environmental compensation, the court stated, “After recording a finding that the manner in which the Environmental Compensation was computed by the PCB was not correct, the only logical order which the NGT could have passed was to remand the matter to the PCB for redetermination of Environmental Compensation in accordance with law.”
The court emphasized the necessity of a scheduled offence for PMLA proceedings, stating, “In the facts of the case, there is neither a registration of First Information Report for any scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 nor any complaint is filed alleging the offences under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.”
The Supreme Court directed the Pollution Control Board to undertake a fresh exercise for determining environmental compensation payable by the appellant, setting aside both the PCB’s original calculation and the NGT’s direction regarding PMLA prosecution.
Mr. Ninad Laud, along with advocates Ashok Kumar Tripathi, Swarnendu Das, and others, appeared for the appellant, while Mr. Arvind Kumar, assisted by Ms. Anuradha Mishra and other advocates, represented the respondent.
Case Title: Waris Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. V. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board
