‘State destroying entire vegetation’; Madhya Pradesh HC bars cutting, pruning, or shifting of any tree in Bhopal in Illegal Tree Felling Case

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., Vinay Saraf, J., directed that no tree in Bhopal shall be cut, pruned, or transplanted in any manner except with the leave of the Court.

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 obtained from the nine-member State Government-constituted 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 State to file photographs along with the GPS locations of each of the 253 trees that were allegedly transplanted. The Court also directed the State to file an affidavit within two weeks indicating what steps were taken pursuant to the order dated 23-05-2025¹passed by the NGT. The affidavit was also required to 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 Court was informed that, despite its direction that no tree shall be cut or pruned except in accordance with permission granted by the Special Committee or the Tree Officer under the Madhya Pradesh Protection of Trees Act (Urban), 2001 (“the Act”), further 244 trees were sought to be cut in Bhopal for the construction of certain residential complexes.

The intervenor contended that a newspaper report of 20-11-2025 in Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal, showed that a novel method had been adopted for cutting the trees under the garb of shifting. The reporter quoted the authorities, who stated that it was difficult to obtain permission for cutting down the trees; thus, there was a proposal to transplant the trees, which required no permission.

Analysis

Regarding the existence of a Tree Plantation Policy in the State, the Court noted that the State denied the existence of any such policy in its affidavit. Further, the Court noted that the photographs placed on record showed that the manner of transplantation was complete stripping of the tree of all its branches and leaves, and planting the tree trunk at an alternate place.

The Court also took note of the communication dated 30-10-2025 issued by the Executive Engineer, Vidhan Sabha Building Controller, to the Principal Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, stating that in the construction of the residential complex, several trees were in the way and they would have to be shifted (uprooted). Accordingly, a large number of branches were being cut, a huge quantity of wood was being collected, and a request had been made to use the wood that had been cut from the obstructing trees.

Noting the aforesaid, the Court stated that the letter clearly showed that the respondents were not, in any manner, trying to protect or transplant any tree in the process of cutting trees, and as many as 244 trees were sought to be cut.

“Clearly, it appears that respondents are not interested in protecting or transplanting any tree but are, in a rampant manner, cutting and destroying the entire vegetation that is coming in the way of alleged development.”

The Court referred to a news article dated 17-11-2025 of Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal, which showed that 8000 trees had been cut for a railway project.

Accordingly, the Court directed that no tree in Bhopal shall be cut, pruned, or transplanted in any manner except with the leave of the Court. Furthermore, the Court directed the personal presence of the following officials for the next hearing:

1. Ajay Shrivastava, Executive Engineer, PWD

2. Under Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat

3. Administrative Officer-cum-under Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat

4. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhopal

5. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest

6. Principal Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat

7. General Manager, West Central Railways

The Court further directed that the State shall file photographs of the alleged transplanted trees on the next date of hearing and listed the matter for 26-11-2025.

[In reference (Suo Moto) v. State of Madhya Pradesh, WP No. 42565 of 2025, decided on 20-11-2025]

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the petitioner: Amicus Curiae Amalpushp Shroti

For the respondent: Deputy Advocate General Swapnil Ganguly, Government Advocate Ritwik Parashar, Deputy Solicitor General Suyash Mohan Guru, Advocates Harpreet Singh Gupta, Manan Agrawal, Shubham Mishra, Nancy Chaturvedi, and P.S. Gupta