Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Friday, May 17, 2024

SC Issues Directions To Study Impact Of Blasting Operations On Chittorgarh Fort

Posted in: Criminal Law
Sun, Jan 14, 24, 19:24, 4 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 8611
the degradation of Chittorgarh Fort that has been in the news for a very long time but many are still blissfully unaware

While most of us are certainly aware of the degradation of Chittorgarh Fort that has been in the news for a very long time but many are still blissfully unaware of it. For the uninitiated, it must be mentioned here that initially a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking some measures to contain the degradation was initiated in 1999.

We then witnessed how the PIL was filed in 2011 by the respondents against the Union of India and others which was aimed to safeguard Chittorgarh Fort by prohibiting blasting within a 10-km radius and simultaneously also restraining the Mining Department from granting leases within the same radius and prohibiting open blasting. The resolution of the petition considered responses from contesting parties and government departments addressing the core question of impact of blasting on the Chittorgarh Fort. While taking the lead, it was Birla Corporation (Respondent No. 20) filed a petition before the Supreme Court.

In this context, it may be noted that the Supreme Court in a most learned judgment titled Birla Corporation Limited Through Its Managing Director vs Bhanwar Singh And Others in S.L.P. (C) No. 21211 of 2012 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2024 INSC 35 that was pronounced as recently as on January 12, 2024 in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction has issued a slew of commendable directions to conduct a comprehensive study on the ever lasting impact that the blasting activities for limestone extraction has on such a historic Chittorgarh Fort and adjoining areas.

At the very outset, this robust judgment authored by a Bench of the Apex Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Hon’ble Mr Justice SVN Bhatti sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “The Chittorgarh Fort represents the quintessence of a tribute to nationalism, courage, medieval chivalry, and sacrifice exhibited between the seventh and the sixteenth centuries by several rulers, like the Mewar rulers of Sisodia, their kinsmen, women, and children.

The Chittorgarh Fort has weathered and withstood many battles and has been a witness to the power and pride of the kings who occupied the Fort. The history is replete with brave, extraordinary and indomitable courage exhibited by the rulers and occupants of the Fort.

1.1 The Chittorgarh Fort is a notified monument under the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act, 1951 and the Ancient Monuments Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, and also a notified UNESCO World Heritage Site. The Fort attracts tourists from far and near for sightseeing and to look at the tall and strong structures on the hilltop of Chittorgarh, evidencing the grit and ability to withstand all adversities. Despite the passage of centuries, from the time of construction, the Chittorgarh Fort retains some significant, world-class structures, including the Vijay Stambh, Kirti Stambh, Padmini Palace, Kumbha Palace and Meera Mandir.”

Most significantly, the Bench propounds in para 24 that, “In the preceding paragraphs, we have noticed other contributory circumstances viz. negligence causing deterioration to the structures in Chittorgarh Fort. Monkey menace, human/tourist footfall, unwanted vegetation growth, and the defacing of statues are a few factors recorded in the report dated 30.09.2014 that are contributing to the deterioration of the Fort.

The extent of damage to the monument is a serious question. So, the prevention of damage from any such collateral activities must be simultaneously addressed by the State Government of Rajasthan and the ASI. Therefore, through this order, a three-pronged study and action plan are implemented. Hence, the following directions:-

24.1 The recommendations in the Report dated 30.09.2014 which are directed against ASI and the State of Rajasthan are implemented within two months from the receipt of this Order. For the said purpose, we direct the Union of India, through the Director General, ASI, to file a compliance report on the deficiencies noted in the monument’s maintenance, steps initiated and progress made by the next date of hearing. 24.2 Respondent No. 8 is directed to ensure strict implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and to take all steps necessary to control the monkey menace and the sources of unauthorised littering in the entire Fort and the neighbourhood.

Respondents Nos. 8 and 12 are directed to issue orders within four weeks from today to the local self-government for the said purpose and the implementation of the directives, is monitored by the regional office of Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board (RSPCB). All the steps needed to implement Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, are completed within four weeks from today. A report on periodic monitoring and the progress made is filed by Respondent No. 12 for and on behalf of Respondent No. 8. The above takes us to the crux of the controversy in the SLPs.

24.3 We declare and hold that notwithstanding any liberal recommendation on undertaking blasting operations nearer to the Chittorgarh Fort, keeping in perspective the continuous exposure of ancient monuments to peak particle velocity (PPV) arising from blasting, a radius of five kilometres from the compound wall of the Fort shall not be subjected to mining by blasting or use of explosives for mining of any minerals. In other words, the manual/mechanical mining operations permitted within a radius of five kilometres are allowed to be continued, subject to the lessees possessing a valid lease in accordance with law.

24.4 To undertake the study of environmental pollution and impact on all the structures in the Chittorgarh Fort from the blasting operations beyond a five-kilometre radius, the Chairman, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, Jharkhand [IIT (ISM)- Dhanbad] constitutes a team of multi-disciplinary experts in civil engineering, earthquake engineering, structural geology and mining engineering, within two weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order and communicates it to the chief engineer of the RSPCB and the Petitioner herein. The chief engineer of the RSPCB shall be the member secretary of the Expert Committee.

24.5 We reiterate the terms of reference already formulated for the study as well, now ordered by this Order, the terms read thus:

 

  1. Whether blasting, including the cumulative effect of blasting beyond a specified distance, has any impact whatsoever upon the structure of the Fort?
  2. What appeared to be the causes that have led to cracks and other damage caused to the Fort, other than ageing simplicitor?
  3. Whether the uncontrolled access to tourists has any adverse impact upon the structure, and if so, any suggested steps to regulate this activity.
  4. Whether the activities within the colony situated in the Fort as well as the flow of traffic, including heavy traffic in the vicinity of the Fort, have any adverse consequences upon the structural integrity of the Fort, and if so, the suggested measures to deal with the problems.
  5. General recommendations on the steps to be taken to restore the structural integrity, to repair the cracks, and generally ensure that no damage in the future is caused to the structural integrity.
  6. A comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) covering all kinds of pollution—air, ground water, noise, etc., by the complete cycle of mining activities, including its transportation.

24.6 With the passage of time, technological innovations have taken place and are kept in perspective by the Committee for carrying out the proposed study. The Committee, in addition to the terms of reference, keeps in perspective, the framework of baseline data collection, advanced remote sensing techniques, advanced survey techniques, seismic monitoring and vibration analysis, geological and geotechnical investigations and structural analysis, as may be applicable to the study. The study shall be carried out for four months from the date of commencement and the blasting activities are allowed to be undertaken during the study period.

24.7 Respondent No. 8 is directed to prepare the list of the leaseholders beyond five kilometres and within a ten kilometres radius and furnish the details of lessees who desire to operate by blasting to the Committee.

24.8 The statement of the Petitioner is accepted that in the proposed study, the Petitioner uses an electronic blasting system, and the explosives used for delay shall not exceed the quantity suggested in the Report of Ministry of Coal and Mines, Indian Bureau of Mines, Mining Research Cell.

24.9 Similarly, any other lessee proposing to undertake mine blasting shall furnish complete data of the mining operations to Respondent Nos. 8 and 12, who would, in turn, pass on the information to the Committee constituted to study the impact of blasting operations from those sites as well.

24.10 Respondent No. 8 ensures that no other lessee undertakes mine blasting operations except the lessees notified to the Committee.

24.11 The hillock and Nimbahera limestone, a geological formation, have existed for ages. The structures on the hillock do not wither away willy-nilly on mineral extraction.

24.12 Respondent Nos. 8 and 12 are authorised to direct stopping of blasting operations if the study at any place results in unexpected damage to the structures in the Fort without waiting for the orders of this Court.

24.13 The Petitioner/Birla Corporation Limited defray all the expenses for carrying out the above study by the committee constituted in terms of this Order.

24.14 In the event of any exigency or urgency, the parties are given liberty to move the Court for directions.

24.15 The Committee files its Report on or before July 5th 2024.”

Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 25 that, “Post on July 9th, 2024.”

In sum, there can be no gainsaying that these most commendable slew of historic directions that have been issued so earnestly and sagaciously by the Apex Court must be implemented at the earliest as so commendably directed in this leading case. It also merits no reiteration that this will go definitely a long way in containing the damage further that blasting activities has caused to the Chittorgarh Fort and its adjoining regions. No denying!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top