Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 1 of 41

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P. (PIL) No. 290 of 2013

Hemant Kumar Shikarwar, S/O Ramlakhan Singh, Resident of

Flat No.502/1, Malawar Resort, Anantpur, Post Office- Doranda,

Police Station – Doranda, District - Ranchi.

………… Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, Post office, Police

Station and District – Hazaribagh.

3. The Director, Mines Department, Government of Jharkhand,

Nepal House, Post Office and Police Station- Doranda,

District - Ranchi.

4. The District Mining Officer, Hazaribagh, Post Office, Police

Station and District – Hazaribagh.

5. The Pollution Control Board, Government of Jharkhand,

Ranchi.

6. The Chairman, Pollution Control Board, Government of

Jharkhand, Ranchi.

7. The Secretary, Pollution Control Board, Government of

Jharkhand, Ranchi.

8. Union of India.

9. Union of India through Ministry of Environment, Forest and

Climate Change, through its Secretary, Indra Prayavaran

Bhawan, Jor Bagh Road, PO and PS Sodhi, New Delhi –

110014.

……… Respondents

---------

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

---------

For the Petitioner: Mr Vijay Narayan Singh, Advocate

For the State: Mr Gaurav Raj, A.C. to A.A.G.-II

For Resp. Nos.5-7: Mr Prabhash Kumar, Advocate

Mr Manish Sharma, Advocate

---------

Reserved on: 21.04.2026 Pronounced on: 07/05/2026

Per M. S. Sonak, C.J.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 2 of 41

1. The instant writ petition concerns the Hazaribagh district of

the state of Jharkhand, a region whose name, derived from

the Persian “Hazar” (thousand) and “Bagh” (garden), evokes

the historical imagery of a land blessed with a thousand

gardens

1

. Once an integral part of the Chotanagpur plateau,

Hazaribagh served as a natural fortress of dense forests and

deep valleys. As documented in Captain Robert Smith's

surveys, these indigenous woodlands were meticulously

preserved by local rulers, providing sanctuary for the tiger, the

leopard, and the bear

2

. However, the "soul" of this region has

undergone a profound and painful transformation.

2. The transition began with colonial-era infrastructure, in which

the construction of military roads and railways initiated a

systematic clearing of the jungle. Early treatises by Walter

Hamilton

3

and Bradley Birt

4

trace this recession, noting how

vast, impenetrable tracts gradually gave way to human

encroachment. What was once a pristine expanse of

biodiversity beginning to diminish, eroding the ecological

balance that sustained the identity of the "City of a Thousand

Gardens."

1 (E. Lister, Bihar and Orissa District Gazetteers: Hazaribagh, Superintendent,

Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, 1918

2 Tales of Hazaribagh: An Intimate Exploration of Chhotanagpur Plateau by Mihir Vatsa.

3 (Walter Hamilton, A Geographical, Statistical, and Historical Description of Hindustan,

Vol. I, London, 1820

4 (F.B. Bradley-Birt, Chota Nagpur: A Little Known Province of the Empire, London, 1910)

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 3 of 41

3. Today, that historical glory stands in stark, distressing contrast

to reality. The landscape is ravaged. Rampant illegal stone

mining, particularly in the Ichak region, has emerged as a

pernicious threat. The very hills that once formed a sanctuary

now stand scarred by unauthorised quarrying operations that

operate with impunity. The forests are receding, and the

gardens are being replaced by craters.

4. It is in this context of environmental depletion and the

unchecked exploitation of natural resources that the present

writ petition has been preferred, seeking, inter alia, the

following reliefs:

(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ/ writs, order/

orders, direction/ directions particularly a writ in

nature of mandamus commanding upon the

Respondents to stop the illegal mining in and around

Siwane River located in Ichak Police Station which is

encircled by a number of illegal stone crusher units,

as these crusher units emit dust causing damage to

100 hectares of cultivable land in connivance with

Respondent No. 2, the Mining Officer.

(b) For issuance of an appropriate writ/ writs, order/

orders, direction/ directions particularly a writ in

nature of mandamus commanding upon Respondent

No. 6, the Chairman, and Respondent No. 7, the

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 4 of 41

Secretary, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board,

to stop illegal mining in the area because these

crusher mining units are owned by local mafia and

any action against these people by the residents is

being threatened by these people for dire

consequences.

(c) For issuance of an appropriate writ/ writs, order/

orders, direction/ directions particularly a writ in

nature of mandamus commanding upon the

respondent Pollution Control Board to submit the

status report of the pollution and action taken by

these respondents in this regard.

(d) For any other relief/ reliefs as Your Lordships may

deem fit and proper in the light of the facts and

circumstances of this case.

5. The above reliefs are sought in the public interest for the

benefit of residents and farmers of the affected cultivable land.

The objective is to protect the environment and preserve the

ecological integrity of the Siwane River and its adjoining

agricultural zones within the Ichak Police Station area of

District Hazaribagh.

6. The petitioner alleges systemic negligence and a persistent

disregard for environmental and statutory mandates regarding

the operation of illegal stone crusher units and unauthorised

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 5 of 41

mining activities around the Siwane River. It is alleged that

these unmonitored operations emit massive quantities of

fugitive dust, resulting in severe damage to approximately 100

hectares of cultivable land. Furthermore, these activities

disrupt the natural ecological flow of the Siwane River, posing

serious hazards to residents, their standing crops, cattle, and

the broader environment.

7. It is further alleged that these illegal stone-crushing and

mining units are owned and operated by local mafias in active

collusion with the local administration, specifically the District

Mining Officer, Hazaribagh. Any resistance or complaints from

residents are reportedly met with threats of dire

consequences, leaving citizens helpless and unable to seek

redress through ordinary channels.

8. Relying upon information obtained under the Right to

Information Act, 2005, the petitioner points out that the stone

crusher operations are being conducted without valid

explosive licences, mineral dealer registrations, or the

mandatory statutory clearances under the environmental laws.

He submits that despite repeated representations made to the

Deputy Commissioner, the District Mining Officer, the

Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, as well as the

Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, the statutory

authorities have failed to take any effective coercive steps,

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 6 of 41

necessitating the intervention of this Court in the public

interest.

9. Inasmuch as the core issues raised by the petitioner pertain to

the rampant illegal stone mining in the Ichak region of

Hazaribagh, an activity that fundamentally threatens the

ecological equilibrium and the environmental rights of the local

populace, this matter transcends the character of a mere

private dispute. It touches upon the collective right of the

"netizens" of this region to live in harmony with a preserved

nature.

10. The legal foundation for such judicial intervention is firmly

rooted in the dictum of State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant

Singh Chaufal & Ors., reported in (2010) 3 SCC 402. In this

landmark precedent, a two-judge Bench of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court meticulously traced the evolution of Public

Interest Litigation (PIL) in India. The Hon’ble Court identified

"Phase-II" of this evolution as a critical era, where the

judiciary consistently entertained matters "relating to

protection, preservation of ecology, environment, forests,

marine life, wildlife, mountains, rivers, historical

monuments etc." The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that

the judicial contribution toward safeguarding our forests and

environment through the medium of PIL has been "extremely

significant."

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 7 of 41

11. It is, therefore, presumably, in the spirit of this constitutional

mandate and the principles enshrined in Balwant Singh

Chaufal (supra) and a long line of precedents, that the

present case has been treated as a "Public Interest Litigation,"

calling for sustained judicial vigilance.

12. Right at the outset, it must be made clear that from the

initiation of this case until the present, the respondent

authorities have never directly discarded the factual narrative

of illegal mining occurring in the said region; rather, the long

trajectory of this litigation reveals that the Respondents have

filed a series of affidavits over the past decade acknowledging

the situation.

13. The counter-affidavits filed between 2013, and January 2015

reveal a list of measures undertaken by the respondent

authorities to curb the mining menace and secure the

ecological integrity of the Ichak region.

14. Acknowledging these documented initiatives, this Court, in its

order dated 20.01.2015, saw fit to record the following

observations:

1) Learned Advocate General appearing for the

respondents-State submitted that a detailed

counter affidavit has been filed in pursuance of

order dated 16th October, 2014 and various steps

have been taken by the State Government. There

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 8 of 41

are District Level and State Level Committee to

prevent such type of illegal mining activities. Now,

stopping orders have also been passed. Criminal

actions have also been initiated and First

Information Reports and charge-sheets have

already been filed in few cases. Some crusher

machines have also been demolished or crushed.

All possible steps have been taken. Nonetheless,

if the petitioner is pointing out any specific

illegal mining, then the State will take action

against those illegal activities, otherwise, this

writ petition may be brought to an end by

giving specific directions to the State.

2) Counsel for the petitioner is seeking time to point

out few names with photographs of the illegal

mining actions, if possible.

3) Matter is adjourned to be enlisted on 16.03.2015.

15. Following these observations, it was brought to the notice of

this Court that the substantive issues of illegal mining were

being addressed at a broader, state level in W.P. (PIL) No.

1806 of 2015. In the interest of a comprehensive judicial

approach, the present matter was briefly merged and tagged

with that larger batch of litigation.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 9 of 41

16. However, recognizing that the unique ecological crisis of

Hazaribagh required a more localized scrutiny, this Court, vide

order dated 11.08.2025, directed the Registry to de-tag the

present case. To bridge the gap between the assertions in the

affidavits and the reality on the ground, this Court sought an

independent inspection report from the Secretary of the

District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Hazaribagh.

17. The said order dated 11.08.2025 is reproduced below:

“Heard.

De-tag this case from the batch files.

The Secretary, DLSA, Hazaribagh is directed to carry out

surprise inspection forthwith and report about the illegal

mining being carried out in and around Siwani River in

Village Tepsa, under Ichak Police Station and report

compliance within one week.

Copy of this order be sent forthwith on WhatsApp to the

concerned Secretary, so as to ensure that the Secretary can

move forthwith and carry out the necessary inspection.

List this case on 18.08.2025.”

18. In compliance with the directions of this Court, the Secretary,

DLSA, Hazaribagh, duly submitted a comprehensive report.

Following the disclosure of this independent assessment, the

Respondent authorities filed further counter-affidavits to

demonstrate the positive measures taken to align with this

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 10 of 41

Court's mandates. In response, the Petitioner has also placed

on record detailed written submissions to assist the Court in

navigating the complexities of the ground situation. These

written submissions and the findings of the DLSA report shall

be addressed and referred to in the operative portions of this

judgment.

19. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held that the

right to a clean, healthy and pollution-free environment,

including the right to clean water and air, is an integral part of

the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article

21 of the Constitution.

20. In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, reported in (1991) 1

SCC 598, the Hon’ble Supreme Court authoritatively declared

that “The right to live includes the right of enjoyment of

pollution-free water and air for full enjoyment of life. If anything

endangers or impairs that quality of life it would be violative of

Article 21.” This principle is reinforced in M.C. Mehta v. Union

of India, reported in (1987) 4 SCC 463, and in subsequent

environmental jurisprudence, wherein the right to live in a

wholesome environment has been recognised as an

inseparable facet of the right to life.

21. The constitutional mandate for environmental protection is

further grounded in Articles 48A and 51A(g) of the

Constitution. Although the directive principles of state policy

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 11 of 41

may not be enforceable in themselves, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court has repeatedly harmonised them with Article 21,

treating them as aids to interpretation.

22. In Subhash Kumar case (Supra), the Hon’ble Court read

Articles 48A and 51A(g) into the right to life, holding that the

State is under a constitutional obligation to prevent

environmental degradation that impairs Article 21 rights. This

interpretative approach was further crystallised in Vellore

Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, reported in

(1996) 5 SCC 647, wherein the doctrines of sustainable

development and precautionary principle were incorporated

into Indian law.

23. Moreover, in the case of Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana,

reported in (1995) 2 SCC 577, it was categorically held by

the Hon’ble Court that the environmental, ecological, air,

water pollution, etc. should be regarded as amounting to

violation of Article 21, Therefore, there is a constitutional

imperative on the State Government and the statutory

authorities, not only to ensure and safeguard proper

environment but also an imperative duty to take adequate

measures to promote, protect and improve both the man-

made and the natural environment.

24. Yet, while our jurisprudence has long celebrated this non-

enumerated right to a clean, healthy and pollution-free

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 12 of 41

environment, the ground reality in Hazaribagh reveals a

landscape in deep distress.

25. The unregulated mining witnessed here is not merely a

technical breach of industrial standards; it has become a

relentless assault on the essential building blocks of life. The

stone dust generated by these units does not remain confined

to the pits of extraction; it travels on the wind, a silent and

invisible toxin that carries the harmful effects of mining activity

even to distant places. Air, which should be a source of

vitality, has become the "worst affected environmental matrix,"

acting as a conduit for ecological decay

5

.

26. We must also consider the silent suffering of the flora and the

earth itself. When stone dust settles upon the leaves of the

forest, it does not merely coat them; it suffocates them. It

forces the closure of the plant’s stomata and resists the net

assimilation rate, forcing cell and tissue changes that turn a

verdant sanctuary into a graveyard of grey

6

. The agrarian

heartbeat of this region, the pride of our heritage, is being

systematically silenced. When agricultural productivity drops

by as much as sixty per cent and the soil loses its organic soul

5 Saurav Kumar Ambastha & Anil Kumar Haritash, Emission of Respirable Dust from

Stone Quarrying, Potential Health Effects, and Its Management, 28 Env't Sci. &

Pollution Rsch. 1 (2021).

6 Swades Pal & Indrajit Mandal, Impacts of Stone Mining & Crushing on Environmental

Health in Dwarka River Basin, 36 Geocarto Int'l 392, 406 (2021).

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 13 of 41

to high alkalinity and low organic carbon, we are witnessing

more than just an economic loss

7

.

27. The human cost of this imbalance is perhaps the most heart-

wrenching. For the families living in the shadow of these

crushers, the environment has been transformed from a

provider into a threat. The air they breathe is heavy with the

promise of disease, cardiac distress, airway inflammation, and

the terminal shadows of silicosis and tuberculosis

8

. It is a

profound injustice that the "residents" of this region, especially

the working communities who spend long hours in direct

contact with emitting fine dust, are forced to trade their health

for their hearth.

28. Moving ahead, the record reflects that the respondent

authorities have initiated certain measures in compliance with

the repeated directions of this Court. These steps are

mentioned in the supplementary counter-affidavits filed by the

District Mining Officer, the Deputy Commissioner, and the

Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh.

29. The record shows that pursuant to this court’s order dated

18.08.2025, and following the report of the Secretary, DLSA,

Hazaribagh, an immediate ban was imposed on all mining

activity in Village Tepsa. A subsequent field inspection

7 Ibid.

8 Ambastha & Haritash, supra note at 5.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 14 of 41

revealed that while six stone crushers held valid registrations,

two specific units, belonging to Sanjay Prasad Mehta and

Suresh Prasad Mehta, were established without the

mandatory Consent to Establish (CTE) from the Jharkhand

State Pollution Control Board. Consequently, show-cause

notices were issued to these violators on 20.08.2025, and the

matter was reported to the Pollution Control Board for further

statutory action under the Water and Air Acts.

30. Furthermore, in accordance with the Court's directions, a joint

order was issued by the Deputy Commissioner and the

Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, on 26.08.2025. This

order led to the formation of three investigation teams tasked

with conducting regular day-and-night surprise inspections.

These teams are required to submit weekly reports, and the

joint order makes it clear that no crusher may operate in

Village Tepsa without a valid certificate from the District

Mining Officer. It is further stipulated that any detected illegal

activity will result in legal action and contempt proceedings.

31. At this juncture, we must address a primary contention raised

by the Petitioner in the rejoinder dated 20.11.2025. It is

asserted by the petitioner that Village Tepsa, the heart of this

litigation, falls within a designated 'Eco-Sensitive Zone.'

Relying on the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, reported

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 15 of 41

in (2022) 10 SCC 544, the Petitioner argues that this status

necessitates an absolute prohibition on all mining activities.

32. Per contra, the District Mining Officer, in the supplementary

counter-affidavit dated 09.12.2025, has countered this

assertion with a specific reference. It is stated that under

Notification No. 2775(E), issued by the Ministry of

Environment, Forest and Climate Change on 01.08.2019, the

village of Tepsa has not been included within the Eco-

Sensitive Zone. To substantiate this stand, the state has

placed the said notification on record, seeking to demonstrate

that the village remains outside the protective perimeter

defined by the Central Government.

33. Upon a perusal of the said notification, it appears evident that

Village Tepsa is indeed absent from the list of villages within

the Ichak administrative block categorised as eco-sensitive.

Consequently, the plea for a total and absolute ban on mining

based solely on the 'Eco-Sensitive Zone' classification cannot

be sustained as a matter of law.

34. However, we must remain mindful that the absence of a

"protected" label does not grant a license to engage in

ecological destruction. While the strictures of the

Godavarman case (supra) regarding Eco-Sensitive Zones

may not apply by default, the overarching duty of the State to

prevent the "suffocation" of the landscape, as discussed in our

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 16 of 41

earlier paragraphs, remains unextinguished. It is against the

benchmark of this unextinguished duty that we must examine

the Respondents' actions.

35. Be that as it may, we make it clear that the decision of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the T.N. Godavarman

Thirumulpad case (supra), in the context of national

parks/wildlife sanctuaries, will have to be obeyed and

enforced by the respondent authorities in the context of

Hazaribagh Wildlife Sanctuary. Therefore, the buffer zone

from the demarcated boundary of the Hazaribagh Wildlife

Sanctuary shall continue to be one kilometre, unless a larger

buffer zone has already been prescribed; in which case, the

larger buffer zone would apply.

36. Furthermore, in pursuance of our directions contained in the

order dated 16.04.2026 in W.P. (PIL) No. 3950 of 2024 in the

case of Anand Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand and ors., we

reiterate that the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board

shall restrict the grant of Consents to Establish (CTE) and

Consents to Operate (CTO) within a zone of 500 metres from

the boundaries of forests or forest land, insofar as stone

mining is concerned, and within a zone of 400 metres, insofar

as stone crushers are concerned.

37. These restrictions shall be strictly enforced across the District

of Hazaribagh, with vigilance directed towards the mining

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 17 of 41

clusters and peripheral forest areas within the Ichak

administrative block, to ensure that no activity is permitted in

violation of these prescribed distances.

38. Notwithstanding these regulatory frameworks, upon a holistic

consideration of the voluminous affidavits filed by the

Respondent authorities, this Court is pained to observe that

these efforts have not achieved the desired outcome

envisioned by the law. The independent report of the

Secretary, DLSA, Hazaribagh, read alongside the materials

placed by the Petitioner, suggests a significant disconnect

between the assertions on paper and the reality on the

ground. We find that the level of enforcement initiated by the

Respondent authorities, including the State Pollution Control

Board, the Deputy Commissioner, the Superintendent of

Police, and the District Mining Officer, falls short of the

proactive vigilance required to curb a decade-long crisis.

39. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that the menace of illegal

mining is not a localised malady confined to the districts of

Jharkhand; rather, it is a man-made crisis of national

proportions, aggressively depleting the country's natural

capital. This systematic plunder of resources exacts an

irreversible toll on biodiversity and ecological security.

Consequently, Constitutional Courts across India have been

compelled to exercise their extraordinary jurisdiction to uphold

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 18 of 41

the principles of "Intergenerational Equity" and the "Public

Trust."

40. The judicial landscape of our country is replete with instances

where High Courts have stepped into the breach created by

executive inertia. For instance, in the recent times, the Hon’ble

High Court of Karnataka, in In Re: Illegal Sand Mining Across

the Rivers in Karnataka vs. State of Karnataka and others, Writ

Petition No. 2938 of 2026 (Suo Motu PIL), and the Hon’ble High

Court of Meghalaya, in Registrar General, High Court of

Meghalaya vs. State of Meghalaya and Others, PIL No. 4/2026,

have issued stringent directions to curb and control such

environmental degradation.

41. This proactive judicial stance is similarly echoed by the Hon’ble

High Court of Uttarakhand in the case of Rohit Mehara Alias

Rohit Singh Mehara vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, WP

PIL No. 58 of 2026, the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in Jayanta

Kumar Rout and others vs. State of Odisha and others,

W.P.(C) No. 31 of 2026, and the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab

and Haryana in M/S Dharampal Stone Crusher vs. The State of

Haryana and Others in CWP-26496-2025 (O&M)].

42. It is pertinent to observe that judicial interventions in these

States have not been necessitated by a lack of statutory

provisions; on the contrary, each of these jurisdictions

possesses a robust regulatory framework and sophisticated

monitoring mechanisms. The 'breach' into which these High

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 19 of 41

Courts have stepped is, therefore, not a legal one, but a

failure of the enforcement machinery to translate paper

regulations into field-level accountability. This disconnect

between a robust hierarchy and its practical dormancy is

precisely what characterises the crisis within our own State.

43. In Jharkhand, the scourge of illegal mining is not a nascent

phenomenon. As early as 2005, the Department of Mines and

Geology, Government of Jharkhand, vide Letter No. 536,

established a specialised enforcement hierarchy. At the apex,

a State Level Task Force was constituted under the

Chairpersonship of the Director, Mines and Geology, while at

the local level, a District Level Task Force was established

under the Chairpersonship of the Deputy Commissioner.

These nodal bodies, comprising members from the Police,

Forest, Revenue, and Pollution Control Departments, were

entrusted with the solemn duty of monitoring and curbing

illegal extractions.

44. The mandate of the 2005 directive was categorical. It

mandated that the State Task Force meet every 3 months and

the District Task Force convene every month. However, the

record placed before us reflects a troubling history of

institutional lethargy. The minutes submitted for the

Hazaribagh District Task Force appear only for a distant

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 20 of 41

period in the past, then, after a significant gap, re-emerge only

in recent months following this Court's intervention.

45. While it remains possible that meetings were held in the

interim, the failure to place those records before this Court

suggests that the administrative activity remained, at best,

sporadic. It appears that the recent increase in administrative

vigilance may be attributed more to the ongoing judicial

oversight in these proceedings than to the regular course of

governance. This documented period of inactivity suggests

that the institutional safeguards designed to protect the

district’s environmental resources remained underutilised

while the landscape of Hazaribagh continued to face

significant distress.

46. Throughout these proceedings, the authorities have cited the

registration of multiple FIRs against defaulters. Yet registering

a case is merely a preliminary step in enforcing the law. To

date, no report has been submitted to this Court indicating

that these FIRs have culminated in actual prosecutions or

trials. Without the finality of judicial determination, these FIRs

fail to serve as an effective deterrent.

47. Furthermore, the District Mining Officer, as the primary

authority under the Mines and Minerals (Development and

Regulation) Act, 1957, has not apprised this Court of a single

complaint initiated by his office under Section 22 of the said

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 21 of 41

Act. While the affidavits mention the seizure of vehicles and

equipment, they are conspicuously silent on whether any

confiscation proceedings have been initiated before the

jurisdictional Magistrate. In this regard, the law is well-settled.

48. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of N.C.T of

Delhi vs Sanjay, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 670, after

considering the relevant provisions of the MMDR Act, opined

categorically that there is no complete and absolute bar in

prosecuting persons under the Penal Code where the

offences committed by persons are penal and cognizable

offences. Ultimately, the Hon’ble Supreme Court concluded in

paras 72 and 73 as under: (SCC p. 812)

“72. From a close reading of the provisions of the MMDR Act and

the offence defined under Section 378 IPC, it is manifest that the

ingredients constituting the offence are different. The contravention

of terms and conditions of mining lease or doing mining activity in

violation of Section 4 of the Act is an offence punishable under

Section 21 of the MMDR Act, whereas dishonestly removing sand,

gravel and other minerals from the river, which is the property of

the State, out of the State's possession without the consent,

constitute an offence of theft. Hence, merely because initiation of

proceeding for commission of an offence under the MMDR Act on

the basis of complaint cannot and shall not debar the police from

taking action against persons for committing theft of sand and

minerals in the manner mentioned above by exercising power under

the Code of Criminal Procedure and submit a report before the

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 22 of 41

Magistrate for taking cognizance against such persons. In other

words, in a case where there is a theft of sand and gravel from the

government land, the police can register a case, investigate the

same and submit a final report under Section 173 CrPC before a

Magistrate having jurisdiction for the purpose of taking cognizance

as provided in Section 190(1)(d) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

73. After giving our thoughtful consideration in the matter, in the

light of the relevant provisions of the Act vis-à-vis the Code of

Criminal Procedure and the Penal Code, we are of the definite

opinion that the ingredients constituting the offence under the

MMDR Act and the ingredients of dishonestly removing sand and

gravel from the riverbeds without consent, which is the property

of the State, is a distinct offence under IPC. Hence, for the

commission of offence under Section 378 IPC, on receipt of the

police report, the Magistrate having jurisdiction can take

cognizance of the said offence without awaiting the receipt of

complaint that may be filed by the authorised officer for taking

cognizance in respect of violation of various provisions of the

MMDR Act. Consequently, the contrary view taken by the different

High Courts cannot be sustained in law and, therefore, overruled.

Consequently, these criminal appeals are disposed of with a

direction to the Magistrates concerned to proceed accordingly.”

49. Moreover, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, again in Jayant v.

State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 670,

reiterated that prosecutions under the IPC and the MMDR Act

are simultaneously maintainable. The failure to invoke the full

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 23 of 41

breadth of these statutory powers undermines the State's

claim of effective intervention.

50. We must also emphasize that the mere seizure of a vehicle,

equipment or machinery by the police is not enough. While

the police may seize property for offences under the IPC, the

law does not stop there. There is no reason why the officers of

the Mining Department should not simultaneously exercise

their independent powers under the MMDR Act, 1957, to

initiate confiscation proceedings before the jurisdictional

Magistrate.

51. The MMRD Act, read with the state rules, provides specific,

stringent powers for this purpose, and there is no excuse for

failing to use them. If the tools used for illegal mining are not

permanently confiscated under the mining laws, the legal

framework fails to act as a real deterrent. This cannot be a

mere coincidence. When the authorities rely solely on police

seizures and ignore the specialised recovery and confiscation

provisions of the mining laws, it suggests a serious dereliction

of duty. This practice allows violators to potentially reclaim

their equipment and resume illegal activities, giving the

impression that the administration is being soft on those

exploiting natural resources.

52. We have been apprised that the Department of Mines and

Geology, Government of Jharkhand, has already

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 24 of 41

operationalised the Jharkhand Integrated Mines and

Mineral Management System (JIMMS) , which stands

integrated with the Central Government’s Mining

Surveillance System (MSS). We have also been informed

that the respondent authorities have at their disposal a

sophisticated arsenal of "technological warfare," including

satellite imagery, geo-tagging, GIS mapping, and GPS-based

vehicle-tracking systems, specifically deployed to monitor and

curb illegal extractions in real time.

53. However, it is a matter of serious concern that, despite the

availability of such cutting-edge surveillance infrastructure, the

authorities have consistently failed to stem the tide of illegal

mining. This persistent failure to act, despite possessing the

sophisticated means to detect and intervene, lends significant

credence to the petitioner’s assertion that the statutory

authorities are not merely negligent but perhaps intentionally

abstaining from curbing these pernicious activities. Where

technology provides the digital "eyes" to see, a continued

failure to act can only be interpreted as a deliberate, willful

closing of those eyes, or a choice to ignore what those eyes

clearly see.

54. If the mining and police officials in Ichak had been vigilant and

genuinely committed to enforcing the legal provisions and

adopting a proactive stance to prevent this scourge, the

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 25 of 41

matter could not have reached this pass. This systemic

failure, however, is not confined to the mining and police

authorities. The degradation of the Ichak region is also a

consequence of the regulatory silence maintained by the

State’s environmental custodians.

55. Accordingly, we now turn to the Jharkhand State Pollution

Control Board. As the apex nodal body for environmental

management in the State, it is unfortunate that its submissions

are notably silent on the compliance of stone crushers with

the national guidelines formulated by the Central Pollution

Control Board (CPCB). This lack of clear regulatory oversight,

coupled with the administrative lapses at the district level,

necessitates a more stringent judicial scrutiny to ensure that

the ecological integrity of Hazaribagh is not irreparably

compromised.

56. In this context, it can be further stated that despite the

registration of dozens of FIRs against the alleged defaulters,

the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board has remained

completely silent and taken no action. This continued

administrative inertia is all the more deplorable inasmuch as

the “Polluter Pays” Principle, as firmly established by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal

Action v. Union of India, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 212,

casts an absolute liability upon the polluter to bear the cost of

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 26 of 41

remediation and restoration of the damaged environment and

to compensate the affected persons.

57. This position has been further reinforced by the recent

decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi

Pollution Control Committee v. Lodhi Property Co. Ltd.,

reported in (2026) 2 SCC 670, wherein it has been held that

the Polluter Pays Principle is a principle of restitutionary and

civil liability and that the Pollution Control Boards are

empowered to impose restitutionary or compensatory

damages under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section

31A of the Air Act in exercise of their statutory powers,

independently of any criminal trial or conviction. The Board’s

failure to act on the strength of this salutary principle not only

perpetuates the environmental harm but also amounts to a

clear abdication of its statutory duty under the Water

(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air

(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

58. Expanding beyond the specific mandates of the Pollution

Control Board, the collective inaction of state authorities

violates the Right to Life. The failure to reclaim mining pits has

created hazardous conditions that jeopardise the very survival

of local inhabitants. Consequently, the continued neglect by

the statutory authorities of the Mining Department under the

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 27 of 41

MMDR Act, 1957, constitutes a clear violation of the Right to

Life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

59. In this regard, the material on record reveals a more

harrowing dimension of this administrative neglect, in which

environmental degradation has become a direct threat to

human life. The photographs contained in the Annexure G

series of the supplementary counter-affidavit dated

29.08.2025, filed by the District Mining Officer, Hazaribagh,

read with Annexure 1 of the report submitted by the Secretary,

DLSA, depict a landscape scarred by abandoned, non-closed

mining pits. These craters, now filled with stagnant rainwater,

have been transformed into deceptive "death traps" within the

village precincts. In the absence of statutory fencing or

reclamation, these pits present what the law describes as an

"attractive nuisance", appearing as innocent ponds to children

and unwary passersby, while masking deep, submerged

industrial hazards.

60. Annexure 4 of the Petitioner’s Synopsis of Arguments reveals

the fatal consequences of this neglect, documenting instances

in which residents and workers have suffered fatal accidents

in these unguarded pits. It is a profound tragedy that the

failure to implement the mandatory reclamation and safety

protocols under the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession

Rules, 2004, has resulted in the loss of human life.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 28 of 41

61. A mining pit left open and filled with water is not merely an

environmental violation; it is a ticking time bomb for the

vulnerable communities residing in its shadow. The State’s

duty to ensure a safe environment under Article 21 must, at

the very least, extend to the prevention of such avoidable

fatalities by ensuring that every mining site is either restored

to safety or strictly secured against public access.

62. The tragic loss of life in these unguarded pits is a direct

symptom of the larger ecological crisis caused by unregulated

mining. The necessity for judicial intervention in such

circumstances is firmly established by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court, most notably in Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana,

reported in (2012) 4 SCC 629, which mandated that even

minor mineral mining requires strict environmental oversight,

and State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay (2014) (Supra), which

emphasized that illegal mining is an offense against the entire

society.

63. Guided by these principles, this Court observes that

unregulated mineral extraction disrupts natural flow patterns,

destabilises riverbeds, and depletes groundwater reserves.

These activities not only degrade the land but also adversely

affect aquatic biodiversity, agriculture, and water security. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently underscored that

mining carried out without scientific studies or statutory

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 29 of 41

clearances reflects a systemic failure of environmental

governance.

64. Moreover, when faced with such continued non-compliance,

as in Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society v. State of

Rajasthan, reported in (2022) 16 SCC 581, the Hon’ble

Court has not hesitated to restrain mining activities until due

process is completed. The cumulative impact of these

practices characterized by irreversible ecological damage and

administrative apathy, necessitates the immediate and strict

enforcement measures we now proceed to direct.

65. Concomitantly, we are mindful of our limitation that, as a

Constitutional court exercising writ jurisdiction, we ought not

typically embark on a roving inquiry into evidence. However,

the prima facie visibility of heavy-machinery operations and

the resulting pollution, as corroborated by the independent

findings in the report of the Secretary, DLSA, Hazaribagh,

requires the administrative authorities to move beyond

cosmetic measures towards substantial enforcement.

66. This independent report, which serves as a vital factual

anchor, details abandoned, water-filled mining pits and

significant environmental distress, transforming these

concerns from mere allegations into documented realities that

demand the immediate application of the "Polluter Pays"

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 30 of 41

principle as established by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

Bichhri Village Case, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 212.

67. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that State authorities'

responsibility extends far beyond merely punishing violators of

environmental laws. The State is under a constitutional

obligation to take proactive steps to prevent such offences

and to restore the environment where damage is apparent. It

is not enough to act after the forests are gone or the rivers are

polluted; the administration must act as a guardian to prevent

such damage in the first place and repair it when it occurs.

68. The DLSA report, when read alongside the state’s own

disclosures, effectively establishes the administrative

dormancy that has allowed these hazards to persist. Under

the Public Trust Doctrine as expounded by the Hon’ble SC in

Fomento Resorts, reported in (2009) 3 SCC 571, the

State’s duty to protect the Siwane River and its surrounding

agricultural zones is absolute.

69. Where unauthorised extraction is indicated, the State is

further obligated under Section 21(5) of the MMDR Act to

recover the market value of the minerals, as directed in

Common Cause v. Union of India, reported in (2017) 9

SCC 499. The authorities can no longer limit their response to

paper-based compliance as the factual narrative prevalent at

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 31 of 41

the ground level demands a transition to measurable and

accountable enforcement on the ground.

70. The documented situation has impelled this Court to intervene

to protect the ecological integrity of the Ichak region.

However, we are of the view that no further public interest

would be served by keeping this petition pending on our

docket. The focus must now shift from judicial deliberation to

field-level execution.

71. Consequently, the gravity of the disclosed lapses and the

urgent necessity for restoration necessitate the issuance of

final, enforceable directions to the State machinery. By

disposing of this matter today, we translate judicial oversight

into a mandatory blueprint for administrative accountability.

Drawing strength from the recent directives of the Hon’ble

Apex Court in the case of In Re: Illegal Sand Mining

reported in (2026 INSC 380), we are of the considered view

that the State can no longer plead institutional

unpreparedness as a ruse for inaction.

72. In view of the foregoing discussion and upon a cumulative

assessment of the pleadings, affidavits, and the independent

report of the Secretary, DLSA, Hazaribagh, this Court is

satisfied that illegal mining activities and the operation of non-

compliant stone crusher units in Village Tepsa and its

surrounding areas stand established.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 32 of 41

73. The material on record further discloses that such activities

have resulted in tangible environmental degradation, including

damage to cultivable land, disruption of the ecological balance

of the Siwane River, and the creation of hazardous conditions

endangering human life. These findings are not merely

incidental but reflect a continuing and troubling pattern of

regulatory failure.

74. It is equally evident that the respondent authorities, including

the District Administration, the Mining Department, the Police,

and the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, have failed

to discharge their statutory obligations in an effective and

coordinated manner. The sporadic registration of FIRs,

unaccompanied by actual prosecutions or statutory action

under the MMDR Act, 1957, and the absence of meaningful

intervention under environmental laws, demonstrate a

systemic lapse in enforcement. Such inaction, in the face of

persistent violations, amounts to a clear failure of public duty.

75. The consequence of this failure is not confined to

administrative inefficiency; it extends to a direct infringement

of the fundamental right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of

the Constitution. The continued exposure of residents to

environmental hazards and the degradation of resources held

in public trust necessitate the immediate application of the

“Polluter Pays” principle and the doctrine of sustainable

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 33 of 41

development. In such circumstances, this Court cannot

remain a passive observer while the landscape is scarred,

and lives are put at risk.

76. Before we conclude, we must add that we find it difficult to

accept that such large-scale unauthorised quarrying

operations, or operations in stark breach of the terms and

conditions under which they may have been authorised, are

possible without the knowledge of the authorities who are

required to prevent them or to bring the wrongdoers to book

immediately. From the material concerning the large-scale

degradation in this region, it is difficult to accept that this is a

simple case of neglect or dereliction of duty.

77. These pernicious activities cannot be carried out in complete

secrecy. They involve heavy earth-moving machinery. They

involve labour. They involve transport on public roads and

through public checkpoints. Still, such activities continue

unabated. The law-enforcement agencies are content with

paper assurances, shifting blame, and avoiding enforcement,

a practice they appear to have acquired expertise in. They are

confident that such dereliction, whether willful or otherwise,

rarely, if ever, invites any disciplinary proceedings or is

honestly reflected in their performance appraisals. They are

supremely confident that such dereliction does not affect their

emoluments, promotions and career prospects.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 34 of 41

78. The petitioners have even made serious allegations that

officials were involved in these pernicious activities for

extraneous considerations. While we do not wish to pursue

this line in this petition, we cannot dismiss the allegations

entirely, given the magnitude of the violations and the

lukewarm response.

79. Accordingly, in exercise of our constitutional mandate, we

dispose of this writ petition by issuing the following directions:

(a) The mandate contained in Letter No. 536 dated

05.10.2005 issued by the Department of Mines and

Geology, Government of Jharkhand, shall be followed in

letter and spirit. The District Level Task Force (DLTF),

Hazaribagh, chaired by the Deputy Commissioner, shall

convene at least once every month without fail. The

minutes of the meetings of the DLTF, as well as the State

Level Task Force, shall be uploaded on the official

websites of the District Administration, Hazaribagh, and

the Department of Mines and Geology within seven (07)

days of each meeting.

(b) The DLTF, Hazaribagh, under the chairpersonship of

the Deputy Commissioner, shall undertake an exhaustive

review of all statutory permissions, including

Environmental Clearances, Consents to Establish,

Consents to Operate, Explosive Licences from PESO,

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 35 of 41

Blasting Permissions from the DGMS, and mineral dealer

registrations granted to stone crusher units and mining

operators in Village Tepsa, the Ichak region, and the

Siwane River area. The review shall assess compliance

with the Environment Impact Assessment Notification,

2006, the applicable guidelines of the Central Pollution

Control Board, and all other relevant statutory provisions.

The DLTF shall grant a personal hearing to the petitioner

(or their authorised representative) and consider all

materials placed before it. A reasoned decision shall be

taken and communicated within a maximum of 8 weeks

from the date of the passing of this judgment.

(c) Pending completion of the aforesaid exercise and

until all statutory permissions and compliances are duly

verified and found to be valid and subsisting, no mining

activity or operation of any stone crusher unit shall

be carried out in the aforesaid areas. Any resumption

of such activity shall be permissible only upon a specific

and reasoned clearance by the DLTF certifying full

compliance with all applicable legal requirements.

(d) We hereby reiterate that there shall be no mining

activity or operation of stone crusher units within a

cumulative buffer zone of one (01) kilometre from the

boundary of the Hazaribagh Wildlife Sanctuary .

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 36 of 41

Provided that, if a larger buffer zone or Eco-Sensitive

Zone has already been prescribed under any other

statutory notification or judicial mandate, the said larger

buffer zone shall prevail and be strictly enforced.

(e) Furthermore, in pursuance of our directions

contained in the order dated 16.04.2026 in W.P. (PIL) No.

3950 of 2024 in the case of Anand Kumar vs. State of

Jharkhand and ors., we reiterate that the Jharkhand

State Pollution Control Board shall restrict the grant of

Consents to Establish (CTE) and Consents to Operate

(CTO) within a zone of 500 metres from the boundaries of

forests or forest land, insofar as stone mining is

concerned, and within a zone of 400 metres, insofar as

stone crushers are concerned.

(f) The DLTF shall implement a technology-driven

enforcement regime, independent of and in addition

to existing infrastructure, or wherever the same is

currently lacking. To ensure the necessary technical and

logistical support, the DLTF shall coordinate with the

State Level Task Force, which is directed to provide the

requisite clearances and budgetary funds. This regime

shall include high-resolution, Wi-Fi-enabled CCTV

surveillance at frequent transit routes and vulnerable

stretches of the Siwane River, alongside mandatory GPS

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 37 of 41

tracking on all heavy machinery and transit vehicles in the

Ichak mining zone, integrated into a Geo-fencing protocol

for automated alerts. The logistical plan and budgetary

requisition shall be finalized within four (04) weeks from

the date of the passing of this judgment, and the

implementation of the technological regime shall

commence in a phased manner, to be substantially

operational within twelve (12) weeks from today.

(g) The DLTF shall establish a permanent

Administrative Secretariat to serve as a formal interface

for the public, providing a dedicated channel for residents

to submit written grievances and complaints. Until a

permanent Secretariat is fully established and operational,

the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, shall

function as the interim Secretariat for this purpose,

ensuring that public access to the Task Force is

maintained without delay.

(h) The DLTF shall, within four (04) weeks from the date

of the passing of this judgment, establish and notify a

dedicated helpline number and official email address for

reporting illegal mining activities. This information shall be

given wide publicity and prominently displayed at all Block

Headquarters, Public Hospitals, and Government offices

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 38 of 41

across the district, and shall be hosted on the official

website of the District Administration, Hazaribagh.

(i) The District Mining Officer, Hazaribagh, shall, within a

period of eight (08) weeks from the date of the passing of

this judgment, initiate formal complaints under Section 22

read with Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals

(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 before the

competent court against all persons and entities found to

be involved in illegal extraction of minerals or

unauthorised operation of stone crusher units, including

those found to be aiding or abetting such activities. The

District Mining Officer shall further initiate proceedings

under Section 21(5) of the said Act for recovery of the

value of illegally extracted minerals.

(j) The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, shall

ensure that all cases relating to illegal mining are

thoroughly and time-boundly investigated, and that

charge-sheets or final reports are filed expeditiously

before the competent courts in accordance with law.

(k) The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh is directed

to ensure that for every FIR registered regarding the

alleged theft of any mineral, whether minor or major, a

copy thereof shall be mandatorily supplied to the District

Mining Officer (DMO) to facilitate the initiation of

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 39 of 41

necessary statutory action. The Station House Officer

(SHO) cum Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police

Station shall be personally responsible for ensuring the

prompt transmission of said copy to the DMO for the

initiation of proceedings under the MMDR Act.

(l) The Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board shall,

within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of the

passing of this judgment, initiate appropriate proceedings,

including criminal prosecution through its authorised

officers, under the provisions of the Environment

(Protection) Act, 1986, the Air (Prevention and Control of

Pollution) Act, 1981, and the Water (Prevention and

Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, against all non-compliant

or non-authorised units. The Board shall also take

immediate steps to close, including disconnection of

electricity, any unit found to be operating without valid

consents or in violation of prescribed norms.

(m) Applying the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle, the Jharkhand

State Pollution Control Board shall, within a period of

twelve (12) weeks from the date of this judgment, assess

and impose environmental compensation upon all

unauthorised or non-compliant units for the damage

caused to the environment, including the cultivable land

and the Siwane River ecosystem. The principles of

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 40 of 41

natural justice must be complied with before such a

determination.

(n) The District Mining Officer, Hazaribagh, within a

period of eight (08) weeks from the date of the passing of

this judgment, shall ensure that all closed, abandoned, or

illegally operated mines in the identified area are secured

and reclaimed strictly in accordance with the applicable

statutory framework and the approved Final Mine Closure

Plans, utilising the available mine closure funds or by

taking appropriate recovery measures against the

defaulting operators as per the Jharkhand Minor Mineral

Concession (JMMC) Rules, 2004.

(o) The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, the

Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, the District Mining

Officer, Hazaribagh, and the Regional Officer of the

Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board shall file

individual compliance reports before this Court within a

period of four (04) months from the date of the

passing of this judgment. The aforesaid officers shall be

personally responsible and accountable for ensuring strict

compliance with these directions, and any failure, delay,

or lapse shall invite appropriate proceedings in

accordance with law.

Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:13668-DB

Page 41 of 41

80. It is clarified that the above directions are issued to further

statutory compliance and shall not preclude the authorities

from taking any additional coercive measures, including the

criminal prosecution of persons operating illegal crusher units

and those responsible for conniving with or facilitating such

operations, in accordance with the law.

81. Let a copy of this judgment be forwarded forthwith to all the

respondent authorities.

82. This petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending I.A.s,

if any, will not survive and are disposed of. No costs.

(M. S. Sonak, C.J.)

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

May 07, 2026

A.F.R.

Manoj/Cp.2

Uploaded on 07.05.2026