National Green Tribunal
Jitul Deka S/O Shri Karuna Deka, General ... vs Union Of India Through Secretary Govt. ... on 10 January, 2022
Item No. 04 Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA
(Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 48/2019/EZ
Jitul Deka Applicant(s)
Versus
Union of India & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 10.01.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SAIBAL DASGUPTA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gora Chand Roy Choudhury, Advocate for R-1,
Mr. Shaurya Sahay, Advocate for R-2,3,5,6,7 & 8,
Mr. Aditya Shankar Pandey, Advocate for R-4
ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the Applicant.
2. One status report on affidavit dated 07.01.2022 has been filed by State Respondents; same is taken on record.
3. One status report on affidavit dated 07.01.2022 has been filed by Respondent No.4, Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board; same is taken on record.
4. In the State affidavit, Mr. Shaurya Sahay, learned Counsel has referred to Annexure A-3, which is Minutes of the Meeting held on 03.01.2022 and which notes that Final Notice for imposing for Environmental Compensation as submitted by the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board has been issued. Out of 93 illegal Mines and Stone Crusher Units only 01 (one) has responded. There were total 118 identified violators, 15 were unidentified violators, total 133, out of whom 94 did not respond to the notice for payment for Environmental Compensation, 19 submitted their replies and in case of 5, notice for payment of Environmental Compensation has been revoked. The relevant chart reads as under:- 1 Number of identified violators 118 Number of Unidentified violators 15 Total Violators 133 Number of violators where no 94
response was received, and Compensation stands confirmed Number of violators where replies 19 were received, however, levy of compensation stands confirmed Number of violators where replies 5 were received leading to revocation of the compensation Total Violators 118
5. The affidavit does not disclose what amount has been recovered so far and what action has been taken against the 15 unidentified violators. The learned Counsel states that they could not be identified till date. The question is what was the Tahasildar of the area concerned or the Deputy Commissioner of the area concerned doing when illegal stone crushing was going on as has been established from the affidavit of the State Respondents. The Tahasildar of the area or the Deputy Commissioner of the area cannot plead ignorance. The State Authority cannot plead ignorance particularly when such stone crushing involves the use of explosives. The illegal crushed stone must have been carried by trucks or dumpers whose records would be available from which the violators can be easily traced out. It is not a case of removing one piece of stone or two pieces of stone. It is a case of illegal mining on a large scale and somebody has aided, assisted and abetted the violators.
6. Section 3 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, reads as under:-
"3. Offence of money-laundering- Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected [proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming] it is untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering."
7. Section 4 of the Act which prescribes the punishment for money-
laundering, reads as under:-
2
"4. Punishment for money-laundering- Whoever commits the offence of money-laundering shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
Provided that where the proceeds of crime involved in money- laundering relates to any offence specified under paragraph 2 of Part A of the Schedule, the provisions of this section shall have effect as if for the words "which may extend to seven years", the words "which may extend to ten years" had been substituted."
8. The rigour of Section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 would not draw the violator within its ambit only but also the Administrative Authorities who have chosen to turn a blind eye or played the role of Nero while the violator/violators desecrated and destroyed the environment.
9. Before we issue any punitive directions for action being taken against the officers of the State, we grant the State Respondents two months further time to file an affidavit not only identifying the remaining 15 environment violators but also stating on record the amount of Environmental Compensation which may have been recovered and what criminal action has been taken against the violators under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002.
10. We also direct that the Deputy Commissioner of the area concerned shall ensure that illegal mining/stone crushing is stopped immediately and shall not be permitted in future.
11. List on 22.03.2022.
.....................................
B. Amit Sthalekar, JM ...................................
Saibal Dasgupta, EM January 10, 2022 Original Application No. 48/2019/EZ MN 3