Read 3 minutes

In 2024, the Supreme Court of India delivered several judgments that shaped the legal landscape in significant ways. These rulings addressed diverse issues ranging from environmental concerns to criminal justice and electoral disputes. Below, we analyze five important judgments that highlight the evolving nature of Indian jurisprudence.

1. M.K. Ranjitsinh vs Union of India (2024)

Issue: How should India protect the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard from extinction?

The Supreme Court addressed the pressing issue of protecting the Great Indian Bustard, a bird facing imminent extinction due to habitat destruction and collisions with overhead power lines in Gujarat and Rajasthan. Previously, the Court had imposed restrictions on overhead power lines, mandating that new power lines in these regions be installed underground. However, the Ministries of Power and New & Renewable Energy argued that such restrictions would hinder solar energy production.

Judgment: The Court overturned its earlier interim order, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach that protects both the environment and India’s renewable energy goals. The Court appointed an expert committee to assess whether underground power lines could be feasible and directed that bird diverters be installed on existing lines to mitigate risks.

Impact: This judgment highlights the complex interplay between environmental conservation and development. The Court recognized the importance of renewable energy in combating climate change while reaffirming its commitment to safeguarding biodiversity.

2. Noble M Paikada vs Union of India (2024)

Issue: Is the 2020 exemption from environmental clearance for road and pipeline projects constitutional?

This case involved a challenge to a 2020 notification by the Ministry of Environment, which allowed soil extraction for road and pipeline construction projects without prior environmental clearance. The petitioner argued that such a sweeping exemption violated the constitutional right to a healthy environment.

Judgment: The Supreme Court struck down the exemption, declaring it unconstitutional. The Court noted that the 2020 notification had been issued hastily, without public consultation, and that it lacked sufficient safeguards to prevent environmental damage.

Impact: This ruling reinforced the principle that the government cannot bypass environmental protection measures in the name of development. It reaffirmed the right to live in a pollution-free environment under Article 21 of the Constitution.

3. Association for Democratic Reforms vs Election Commission of India (2024)

Issue: Should Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) be discontinued or should there be 100% verification of votes via Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT)?

Judgment: The Court upheld the use of EVMs and rejected the demand for 100% VVPAT verification. The current system, which allows for random checks of VVPAT slips in five polling stations per constituency, was deemed sufficient to ensure election transparency. The Court did, however, issue further procedural safeguards to enhance the system.

4. Mineral Area Development Authority vs Steel Authority of India (2024)

Issue: Can states impose taxes on mineral rights and mine-bearing lands, and is royalty a form of tax?

Judgment: The Nine-Judge Bench ruled that royalty on mining leases is not a tax. While states have the power to impose taxes on mineral rights under Entry 50 of List II, such power is subject to limitations imposed by Parliament. However, the Court found that the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act does not limit states’ taxing power.

5. Gene Campaign vs Union of India (2024)

Issue: Is the Union Government’s approval for the environmental release of genetically modified mustard (DMH-11) lawful?

Judgment: The Division Bench delivered a split verdict. Justice Nagarathna invalidated the approval citing procedural flaws and risks to public health, while Justice Karol upheld it, emphasizing the need for continued field trials. The case was referred to a larger bench.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgments in 2024 reflect its active engagement in matters of constitutional importance, environmental protection, human rights, and electoral integrity. Whether addressing issues of biodiversity conservation, workplace safety for professionals, or the fairness of democratic processes, the Court continues to evolve as a protector of the Constitution and the rights of the citizens. These decisions serve as reminders of the Court’s crucial role in ensuring justice and fairness in a rapidly changing society.

Related Posts-