Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a suo motu writ petition registered regarding the reported illegal chopping of 488 trees near Bhopal, the Division Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, CJ., and Vinay Saraf, J., directed the State to file photographs along with the GPS locations of each of the 253 allegedly transplanted trees.
Background
The Court took suo motu cognizance based on an article published in the Times of India, Delhi, on 29-10-2025, reporting that 488 trees were axed by the PWD near Bhopal without permission from the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) appointed body. The report further indicated that no permission was taken from the State Government constituted nine-member Committee (“Special Committee”) or from the Tree Officer. Apparently, permission was granted by the Additional District Magistrate, Raisen, for the felling of trees.
On the last date, the Court directed the Public Works Department (“PWD”) to file an affidavit stating how many trees were cut for the subject project and how many trees were further sought to be cut. PWD shall also indicate whether permission was obtained from the Special Committee as per the directions issued by the NGT and/or the Tree Officer.
Accordingly, the State filed an affidavit contending that permission was granted by the Collector on 03-06-2025 to translocate 448 trees, and that, for those which could not be translocated, the State shall plant 10 times the number of such trees.
Analysis
At the outset, the Court allowed an impleadment application by an intervenor. The Court noted that, as per the intervenor’s documents, the proposed construction activity was being conducted in the vicinity of a protected monument, i.e., the Historical Dam of Paramar Period, Kiratnagar. Accordingly, the Court issued notice to the Archaeological Survey of India.
The Court held that the photographs placed on record of the alleged transplanted trees showed that none of the trees were transplanted; rather, they were cut completely, and the tree trunks were imbedded in the ground, some of which had started sprouting. However, the photographs did not indicate that any of the trees were re-transplanted.
The Court directed the State to file photographs along with the GPS locations of each of the 253 trees that were allegedly transplanted. The State shall file an affidavit within two weeks indicating what steps were taken pursuant to the order dated 23-05-20251 passed by the NGT. The affidavit should also mention whether any Tree Plantation Policy was in force in Madhya Pradesh, and if not, whether any steps were taken to formulate it to preserve the trees.
The Court further directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to depute a Forest Officer to identify each of the alleged transplanted trees and ascertain the status and health of the allegedly transplanted trees.
The matter was listed for 20-11-2025.
[In reference (Suo Moto) v. State of Madhya Pradesh, WP No. 42565 of 2025, decided on 04-11-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioner: Amicus Curiae Amalpushpa Shroti
For the respondent: Government Advocate Ritwik Parashar, Advocates Harpreet Singh Gupta, Nancy Chaturvedi, and Manan Agrawal
1. Original Application No.68/2025 (CZ)