Delhi-NCR Air Pollution: “If some people are behind bars, it will send the correct message,” Supreme Court’s Harsh words on Farmers Burning Stubble

Today (September 17, 2025), the two-judge bench of the Supreme Court (SC) of India, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, heard an issue related to air pollution in the Delhi-NCR region. While hearing the matter, the SC expressed the need to prosecute farmers involved in the stubble burning. The bench said, “It will be difficult for an officer at a broad level to monitor so many villages. If he finds that some of the argiculterers are violating this condition, then you should send at least some people behind the bar, it will send the right message. Why don't you consider having a penal provision even in so far argiculterers are concerned.” 

During the proceedings, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who appeared for the Union, contended that the Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR & Adjoining Areas Act (CAQM Act) includes penal provisions against erring officers, and clarified that the Environment Protection Act has no penal provisions against stubble burning. Replying to this, the top court asked them to consider penal provisions. Moreover, the CJI said, “I had read in newspapers that this can also be used as biofuels. We cannot make this a 5 yearly exercise. Farmers are special and we are eating because of them.. but it does not mean that we cannot protect the environment you see.” He stressed, “You consider it, else we will issue a mandamus. You cannot just withdraw the prosecution, only looking at a 5-year exercise.”

Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra, who appeared for the State of Punjab, submitted, “The majority of the farmers are hand-to-mouth; these are small farmers. For big farmers, surely some measure has to be taken, but for a person who only has a land of one hectare, for him that is his view all and end all - this is his livelihood, now if you pick him up and put him behind bars, 5 people who are dependent on him also suffer.” Hearing this, the CJI replied that they are not asking to do it as a routine, “we are only saying that if it is done on (inaudible) basis, then it will act as a deterrent.” After hearing, the top court adjourned the matter for next week.