SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(MP) 743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (JABALPUR BENCH)
Jagdish Prasad Gupta, J.
A.S. Bansal - Appellants
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
M. Cr. C No. 40963 of 2018
Decided On : 12-12-2019

The central legal point established in the judgment is that the rules and provisions of the Environmental Protection Act regarding Bio-Medical Waste are applicable to the institute producing bio-medical waste, and without proper authorization, managing and handling of bio-medical waste would be a violation of the rules and an offence under Section 15 of the Act.

Headnote:

Environment Protection Act - Bio-Medical Waste - Section 15 - Rules 4 and 10 of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998, Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016 - The court discussed the provisions of Rules 4 and 10 of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 and Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016, highlighting the duty of the occupier and the procedure for authorization. The court emphasized that the rules and provisions of the Act are applicable to the institute producing bio-medical waste and that without proper authorization, managing and handling of bio-medical waste would be a violation of the rules and an offence under Section 15 of the Act. However, the court found that the complaint lacked averments of the applicant violating the provisions and rules, and the respondent's failure to follow the provisions of Section 10 and 11 before alleging violation. The court concluded that the proceeding of the criminal case would be a misuse of the court's process and set it aside.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent filed a complaint against the applicant for operating a clinic and hospital without following the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act regarding Bio-Medical Waste, punishable under Section 15 of the Act. The applicant argued that they did not violate any rules as they closed the clinic and hospital before the expiry of the permission obtained.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the complaint lacked averments of the applicant violating the provisions and rules, and the respondent's failure to follow the provisions of Section 10 and 11 before alleging violation. The court concluded that the proceeding of the criminal case would be a misuse of the court's process and set it aside.

Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged violation of the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act regarding Bio-Medical Waste by the applicant and the respondent's failure to follow the provisions of Section 10 and 11 before alleging violation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the rules and provisions of the Act are applicable to the institute producing bio-medical waste and that without proper authorization, managing and handling of bio-medical waste would be a violation of the rules and an offence under Section 15 of the Act.

Final Decision: Exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the court set aside the proceeding of the criminal case filed by the complainant.

ORDER :

Jagdish Prasad Gupta, J.

1. The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashment of proceeding of Cri. Case No. 1266/2017 under Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 pending before JMFC, Jabalpur.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that on behalf of the respondent, before JMFC, Jabalpur, a complaint was filed on 3.10.2017 against the applicant with regard to operating Ms. Bansal Supertek Clinic and Ms. Bansal Hospital, without following the provision of the Environmental Protection Act with regard to Bio-Medical Waste which is punishable under Section 15 of the Act. As the applicant is operating the aforesaid clinic and hospital without getting any authority under the Act after 7.10.2010, without further authorization or informing to close the institute which is violation of Rule 4 and 10 of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 and the Bio-Medical Management Rules, 2016. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate and the trial is going on.

3. The aforesaid proceeding has been challenged here on the ground that the applicant took permission from the respondent for Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 which was valid till 7.10.2010 but before the expiry date, the applicant closed the clinic and hospital, therefore, mere is no need to take, further permission under the aforesaid rules, therefore, the applicant has not violated any rules and committed no violation of the Act. Further submitted that neither in complaint nor in any document, it is disclosed that after 7.10.2010, till filing of the complaint, any officer of the Board inspected the premises to find out that the clinic and hospital were running or not or any bio-medical waste was produced. None of the complaint has been made by any person, with regard to collection, transportation, storage or non-disposal of the bio-medical wastage, in the premises of the alleged clinic or hospital. The condition of permission till 7.10.2010 which is Annexure 3, filed with the complaint is concerned, the conditions are applicable till the validity period of the authorization, after expiry of the period. No term and condition would survive. On expiry of the period, there was no obligation for the applicant to take prior permission of prescribed authority to closed down the facility, hence there is no violation of Rules 4 and 10 as mentioned earlier, under the circumstances, if the allegations be taken as it is, the applicant cannot be held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act. In the circumstances, the continuation of the proceeding would amount to misuse of the process of court. Hence the proceeding be quashed.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-complainant submitted that earlier the applicant obtained permission which is Annexure A-3, filed with the complaint, which was valid till 7.10.2010, thereafter, the applicant has not applied for terms and operating the hospital and despite of the notice dated 4.4.2017, Annexure P-4. No application for further authorization has been filed before going further. Therefore, the applicant is liable to be punished.

5. It would be appropriate first to see the provision of Rules 4 and 10 of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 which are as under:-

"4. Duty of occupier.-It shall be the duty of every occupier of an institution generating bio-medical waste which includes a hospital, nursing home, clinic, dispensary, veterinary institution, animal house, pathological laboratory, blood bank by whatever name called to take all steps to ensure that such waste is handled without any adverse effect to human health and the environment.

10. Annual report.-Every occupier/operator shall submit an annual report to the prescribed authority in Form II by 31st January every year, to include information about the categories and quantities of bio-medical wastes handled d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top