Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a writ petition filed for the clean-up and removal of toxic waste from the Union Carbide Factory site in Bhopal, following the catastrophic Bhopal Gas Tragedy, a Division Bench of Atul Sreedharan and Anuradha Shukla, JJ., directed the State to expeditiously examine the issue of shifting the containment site to a place, anywhere in the State, which was in a seismic zone of the lowest level and far away from habitation.

Background

On 03-12-2024, the Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the pace of progress in the case, highlighted the serious risks to public health and safety that persist due to the authorities’ inaction, and issued directions for immediate action.

In the last order dated 30-06-2025, the Court had directed the constitution of an Expert Committee and the personal appearance of the members or appearance of their representatives, who are aware of the facts of the case.

Pursuant to the last order, the Expert Committee was constituted, and the following experts appeared in Court:

  1. V.P. Yadav – Scientist F (Central Pollution Control Board),
  2. Deepti Kapil – Scientist E (Central Pollution Control Board),
  3. M.P. Patil – Chief Scientist (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research- National Environmental Engineering Research Institute), Nagpur,
  4. A.D. Bhandarkar- Chief Scientist (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research – National Environmental Engineering Research Institute), Nagpur,
  5. Jowin Joseph – Senior Scientist (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research – National Environmental Engineering Research Institute), Nagpur,
  6. S.N. Dwivedi – Regional Officer (Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board), Indore, and
  7. Atul Kotiya – Scientist, Regional Lab (Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board) Indore.

The experts did not deny that the ash, which was the residue of the incineration process of waste material from the Union Carbide Factory, was also toxic and could not be disposed of or exposed to the environment.

The experts also contended that a state-of-the-art facility would be built for the underground containment of this ash. However, as of now, the same containment facility was 500 meters away from habitation, as per the experts, and 50 meters, as per the petitioners.

Analysis

As it was undisputed that the residue from the incineration process was also toxic and needed to be contained for almost 30-40 years, the Court directed the State to expeditiously examine the issue of shifting the containment site from habitation to a place, anywhere in the State, which was in a seismic zone of the lowest level and far away from habitation. The Court reasoned that this was to ensure that even if there was an accidental leaking/leaching of the residue into the groundwater sources, then human, animal life, and the environment were not adversely affected.

The Court further directed that the experts shall file their affidavits based on the analysis report of the Regional Laboratory of the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, which was presented in Court. They were directed to file another set of affidavits to the effect that if these toxic elements were to come in contact with water sources, resulting in leaching, then it would get diluted to the extent that it would stay within permissible limits and not be harmful.

The matter was listed for 14-08-2025 on top of the list.

Also Read:

Bhopal Gas Tragedy | MP High Court directs immediate toxic waste cleanup from Union Carbide Factory site

[Alok Pratap Singh (Deceased) In Rem v. Union of India, WP No. 2802 of 2004, decided on 31-07-2025]


Advocates who appeared in this case :

For the petitioner: Senior Advocate Naman Nagrath and K.N. Fakhruddin

For the respondent: Dy. Solicitor General Shrikrishna Sharma, Additional Advocate General H.S. Ruprah, Panel lawyer Akash Malpani, Senior Advocate Kishore Shrivastava, Shiraz Patodia, Divya Sharma, Kunal Thakre, Ashish Singh, Vikram Johri, Senior Advocate Ajay Gupta, Rajeev Mishra, Teerthesh Bharilya, Rahul Diwaker, N. D. Jayprakash (present in person for the Intervenor/Bhopal Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahyog Samiti), Rachna Dhingra (Petitioner present through Video Conference), Sr. Advocate Avi Singh, Shreyas Dharmadhikari, and Teerthesh Bharilya

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.