Back
GITA GOPI
RIBECCA LAMINATES – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GITA GOPI, J.
1. The applicants are the original accused of the Criminal Case No. 33 of 2013 whereby they have been convicted by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morbi on 12.07.2014, for the offences punishable under Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’). M/s. Ribecca Laminates - a partnership firm was punished with fine of Rs. 75,000/- and in default of payment of amount of fine, its partners being accused Nos. 2 to 8 to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment.
1.1 Accused Nos. 2 to 8 found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 15 of the Act, were sentenced for 2 years RI with a fine of Rs.40,000/- each. Thus, total Rs.2,60,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo six months SI.
1.2 The said judgment was challenged by way of filing an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2014 by accused Nos. 2 and 3 and Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2014 by rest of the accused before the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Morbi. The appellate Court dismissed both the appeals and confirmed the judgment of the trial Court on 13.12.2019.
1.3 Criminal Revision Application No. 41 of 2020 is arising out of the judg
The necessity of prior environmental clearance is critical, but lack of evidence for actual production and environmental harm can invalidate a conviction under the Environment (Protection) Act.
(1) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 does not prohibit ex post facto Environmental Clearance – Grant of ex post facto EC in accordance with law, in strict compliance with Rules, Regulations, Notifi....
Manufacturing units with pollution board consents can operate pending ex-post facto environmental clearance despite lacking prior EC, if applied timely post-direction and comply with norms, avoiding ....
Environmental Clearance – Where adverse consequences of denial of ex post facto approval outweigh consequences of regularization of operations by grant of ex post facto approval, and establishment co....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fresh appraisal and prior clearance for changes in the scope of construction projects, as well as the applicability of penal pr....
All mining operations require Environmental Clearance post-15.01.2016, and the Jan Vishwas Act does not retroactively decriminalize past violations of the Environment (Protection) Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that prosecution under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 may be considered an abuse of process of law if environmental clearance is granted af....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
