New Delhi, Sept 18 – Expressing concern over rising pollution levels during the winter season, the Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Punjab Government on why farmers who continue to burn stubble should not be arrested to send a strong message.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, with Justice K Vinod Chandran, remarked that if the state failed to act, the court might be compelled to step in. “You take a call, otherwise we will issue a mandamus (court order),” the Bench said while hearing the matter.
The court also directed the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the state pollution control boards of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan to come up with measures within three weeks to curb air pollution. The Bench was hearing a suo motu case concerning vacant posts in the CAQM, CPCB and state boards but turned its focus to the recurring issue of stubble burning.
Chief Justice Gavai pressed senior advocate Rahul Mehra, representing the Punjab Government, on whether punitive steps were being seriously considered. “Farmers are special and we are eating because of them, but it does not mean that we cannot protect the environment. Why don’t you think of some penalty provisions? If some people are behind bars, it will send the correct message. If you have a real intention of protecting the environment, then why shy away?” the CJI asked.
The Bench further noted that despite repeated assurances, Punjab had not introduced stringent enough measures to deal with the practice, which is common in Punjab, Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh and Delhi as a quick way to clear fields for the next sowing season. At the outset, the court also observed that stubble could be repurposed as biofuel instead of being set on fire, adding that the state must consider “stricter punitive provisions if it is genuinely committed to environmental protection.”
Responding to the observations, Mehra argued that the state government had already made progress, pointing out that incidents of stubble burning had dropped sharply from 77,000 to 10,000 in recent years. He cautioned, however, that arresting small farmers, who typically own about one hectare of land, could have severe consequences for their families.
Taking note of this, the CJI clarified that arrests may not need to be routine but could be considered in exceptional cases to set an example. “The intention is not to target vulnerable farmers but to ensure that there is a deterrent effect,” the Bench remarked.
Meanwhile, the Bench instructed the CAQM to deliberate with the CPCB and state boards to draw up a concrete plan to check stubble burning and other pollution sources. The agencies were asked to submit a detailed report within three weeks. The matter has been listed for further hearing on October 8.
