“If all mankind were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed ten thousand years ago. If wildlife were to vanish, the environment would turn into chaos.”
~By E.O. Wilson
“I think it is the first time that our Supreme Court accepted the submission. And in international jurisprudence, we were the first country, or rather the first court, to shift from anthropocentric to eco-centric approach,” the Supreme Court Judge Justice P.S. Narsimha said at the National Environmental Conference-2025 organised by the National Green Tribunal at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi1. The judge himself accepts the paradigmal shift towards a more eco-centric approach in Indian Jurisprudence. The court wants to rely upon judicial innovation but the development imperative prevents it from committing the ecocentrism from anthropocentric essence of law.
INDIA ON ENVIRONMENT IN POST-INDEPENDENCE ERA
The staggering volume of constitutional debates contains a thousand pages of rhetoric but not even a single discussion on environmental protection and conservation. Even the presence of Adivasi leaders like Jaipal Singh Munda, Boniface Lakra, Devendra Nath Samanta, Ramprasad Potai2, assembly could not acknowledge the very rights of the vulnerable communities who have nurtured nature for millennia and conservation of sacred mother nature on the other. Instead the leader chose silence, the Nehruvian socialization, ruthless economic liberalisation, aggressive industrialization cropped up the eco-protection, leading to irreversible environmental degradation, deforestation and nature’s exploitation. We marched blindly towards anthropogenic progress, completely detached from the living nature supporting us. The question
is now more pressing than ever before—from 1951 to 2000, sea levels around India rose by 3 mm3, heatwaves became 100 times more likely and India’s carbon emissions rose up to 1000 percent4, per capita carbon footprint of Indians increased by 3.25-3.27 billion tonnes CO₂5.
RISE OF ECO-ACTIVISM IN INDIA
Early policy formulations were devoid of the environmental precautions. In the 1970s, the world turned towards environmental conservation and events like the 1972 Stockholm Conference, India began to formalize its environmental approach, marking the beginning of policy reforms aimed at balancing development with ecological preservation.
As a compliance to the treaty, in 1976, the Constitution was amended to include two soft non-legal obligation i.e. Directive principle of state policy under Articles 48A and 49 for the government and fundamental duties under Article 51A (g) of the Constitution to “protect and improve” the environment for the citizens.
The human-induced disastrous Bhopal gas tragedy, 19846 occurred wherein the highly toxic gas leaked from the UCIL resulting in the casualties of 2259, a similar case happened in M.C. Mehta And Anr vs Union Of India & Ors, 19867that forced the judiciary to take the eco-issue more seriously. It established the doctrine of Absolute Liability. Guha and Gadgil noted that the environmental activism arisen from Chipko movement for Uttarakhand deforestation or Silent Valley for National Park conservation in Kerala had led to the India’s environmental policy include the establishment of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) in 19858 The promulgation of the Environment Protection Act (1986), and the National Forest Policy (1988), which aimed to curb deforestation and promote sustainable land use.
The 1990s and 2000s saw India increasingly engaging with international environmental frameworks, including the Rio Earth Summit (1992) and the Kyoto Protocol (1997), and emphasizing the integration of environmental concerns into the developmental agenda. India’s commitment to sustainable development was solidified through national policy initiatives, including the adoption of the robust environmental laws such as Environment Protection Act (1986), National Forest Policy (1988), National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) in 20089.
The effective implementation of these policies has been an issue. Weak enforcement mechanisms, inadequate institutional capacity, and a general lack of public awareness about environmental concerns often hinder the desired outcomes. The major challenge is globalization and international commitments of India, as a signatory to several international environmental agreements, and therefore faces external pressures to adopt ambitious sustainability measures. However, balancing global expectations with national priorities presents a complex dilemma for the government.
NEED OF ECOCENTRIC JURISPRUDENCE
What if I tell you that the sparrow ‘goraiya’ that frequently used to chirp in our verandahs, have now become a ‘near to extinction’ species. An ornithological survey conducted by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) revealed the plummeting decline of these tiny birds up to 70% in India, followed by 80% in Andhra Pradesh alone, 20% in Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan and 70-80% in coastal regions. Despite having IUCN status as least concern, these birds are on the verge of rapid decline.10
Lord Roberts in his famous book ‘Forty-one years in India’ he remarked that “Go to India; the Taj alone is well worth the journey.” But our global reputation could escape the corrosion, M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors, 199611the court remarked that “the Sulphur Dioxide emitted by the Mathura Refinery and the industries when combined with Oxygen – with the aid of moisture – in the atmosphere forms sulphuric acid called “Acid rain” which has a corroding effect on the gleaming white marble. Industrial/Refinery emissions, brick-kilns, vehicular traffic and generator-sets are primarily responsible for polluting the ambient air around Taj Trapezium (TTZ)…Fungal deterioration is worst in the inner chamber where the original graves of shah-Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal lie. According to the petitioner The Taj – a monument of international repute – is on its way to degradation due to atmospheric pollution.”12
The Jal Shakti Ministry unveiled the severe pollution in the Ganges wherein the 5 Ganga states excretes about 10,160 MLD of sewage in the Ganga mainstream against its STP capacity of 7820 MLD13 as of 2025. Kanpur alone generates 274.50 million liters of sewage into Ganga resulting in massive death and water-borne infectious disease. The sacred river who is worshipped at one place and is herself subjected to evils of anthropogenic pollution on the other.
The population of Great Indian Bustard ranges only from 110-150 birds only and is restricted to the niche habitat of 16% of Rajasthan’s Thar as per the report by Wildlife Institute of India (WII) under the Environment Ministry 2025 . The status report, released Thursday by Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav and the first since 2017-18, found that the GIB population was estimated as 130 birds with a range of +/- 21. In M K Ranjitsinh & Ors. vs Union of India 202414, case highlighted that the power line collision leads to the death of 1 lakh birds every year15 and the GIB is vulnerable to the power lines due to lack of frontal vision. Hence the population of GIB has disappeared from everywhere except Gujarat and Rajasthan. The precious wildlife has become a IUCN critically endangered species due to loss of habitat, telephonic cable, power line mitigation.
The list doesn’t end here, the asiatic lions, one-horned rhinoceros, gharials, mangrove forests, Namdapha flying squirrel and many more are the victim of anthropogenic activities to such an intensity wherein the species are on the verge of extinction. For decades, the unchecked human greed has forced the environment to the verge of collapse. Mahatma Gandhi said “The world has enough for everyone’s need but not enough for everyone’s greed”16. Although the Parliament and judiciary intervenes as guardians, but fails to patch up with the same.
Now a critical question arises; Will the Indian justice system finally abandon its human- first, anthropogenic approach and finally shift towards the ecocentric model of justice that grants the right to nature of its own..? The pressing question is how India can maintain its trajectory of high economic growth while simultaneously addressing its escalating environmental issue.
JUDICIAL ECOCENTRISM
The proactive shift of judicial pronouncement from purely anthro-centric towards more ecocentric has become a new trend nowadays, particularly concerning the rivers and natural entities. A radical jurisprudential shift is underway toward ecocentrism—the belief that the natural world possesses its own intrinsic value and rights, completely independent of human utility.
Almost a year to the day from Bhopal tragedy, there was a fatal accident when oleum gas leaked from the Shriram Food and Fertilisers factory in Delhi. The bench in the M.C. Mehta And Anr vs Union Of India & Ors, 1986 evolved the doctrine of Absolute liability that is strict liability without any exception and redefined corporate accountability. It expanded Article 21 to include the right to a clean, safe, and healthy environment.
The spark of ecocentrism occurred in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs Union Of India & Ors, 199617 SC revolutionised environmental law and forest conservation. Initiated in 1995 to halt timber operation in Nilgiri wherein the court redefined the definition of forest and established that Forest conservation act is applied to all the forests regardless of ownership. It prioritised ecological preservation over the commercial exploitation imperative. It set the baseline for ecological integrity.
The Virendra Gaur And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors, 199418, SC came up with the question whether Article 21 includes environmental rights? The court expanded the scope of Article 21 to the right to a pollution-free environment. Additionally, the landmark judgement of Vellore Citizen Welfare forum vs. Union of India, 199619, the supreme court legally established the Precautionary principle and polluter pays the principle as the major component of Environmental law.
In its landmark 186th Report (2003)20 The Law Commission of India under JUSTICE M. JAGANNADHA RAO aggressively challenged the legacy judicial framework, asserting that generalist, human-centric courts were fundamentally unequipped to understand complex ecological circumstances. Hence, argued for the establishment of environmental courts for the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 under the Art. 253 of the Constitution.
Similarly, the alarming, unnatural and mysterious death of elephants in the Mysore forest area in Karnataka, wherein the Karnataka High Court intervene in a significant Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the case Suo Motu vs The State Of Karnataka, 200921in order to investigate the causes these deaths identify any administrative lapse and enforce wildlife measures to ensure ecological security. The court’s aim was to draw attention to the statutory duties of the executive authorities and to emphasize the public’s role in protecting wild animals, particularly elephants, to ensure environmental and ecological security. Subsequent hearings involved the submission of reports and action plans by the Government and experts, including a comprehensive report titled “Elephant Landscape” and another action plan. HC adopted an ‘ecocentric approach’ for elephant conservation, prioritizing habitat protection over developmental projects. Crucially, courts have begun to prioritize animal welfare even over human fundamental rights or traditional practices.
In its landmark 186th Report (2003)22 The Law Commission of India under JUSTICE M. JAGANNADHA RAO aggressively challenged the legacy judicial framework, asserting that generalist, human-centric courts were fundamentally unequipped to understand complex ecological circumstances. Hence, argued for the establishment of environmental courts for the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 under the Art. 253 of the Constitution.
Centre For Environmental Law, Wwf-I vs U O I & Ors on 15 April, 201323, oftenly referred as Asiatic Lion case, protected the last habitat of asiatic lion in the Gir forest. He redirected the reallocation of endangered species from Gujarat’s Gir forest to Madhya Pradesh’s Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary. The ruling mandated the translocation and creation of endangered species will protect it from extinction from potential localised outbreaks or any sorts of human-induced disaster.
In Lalit Miglani vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ors., 201724, Uttarakhand High Court declared glaciers, rivers, streams, and other natural ecosystems as legal entities with rights akin to living beings, appointing officials as ‘loco parentis‘ for their protection. This directly elevates nature’s status, treating harm to it as harm to humans. For animals, the judiciary has increasingly recognized their inherent rights and welfare.
The judicial activism extended to such a peak where the High court itself intervened to the barbaric treatment of the ponies in the Ridge, a famous heritage and tourist site in Shimla without a formal petition being filed by the affected party. Court On Its Own Motion vs The Deputy Commissioner, 201825in a landmark suo moto Public Interest Litigation where infrastructural deficiencies, lack of potable water, unhygienic condition which was associated with destruction of town’s heritage character. It mandated shelter for horses. The legal framework underpinning this shift includes: Article 21 (Right to Life): Broadly interpreted to include the right to a clean and healthy environment and, by extension, the protection of animal life and dignity.
Shree Degray Oran Temple And Or vs State Of Rajasthan on 31 January, 202326 was a prominent environmental and public interest litigation concerning the conservation of critically endangered species of Great Indian Bustard and protection of sacred Oran community land from industrial development. The petitioner has challenged the installation of transmission lines in sacred Oran land in Jaisalmer citing that it could both ecological damage to GIB habitat. Also the petitioner argued for the protected religious centre in Oran temple. It explicitly applied ecocentrism to protect endangered species, mandating costly mitigation measures over development.
CONCLUSION
The rise of judicial activism on the approach of ecocentrism has been becoming the trend in Indian Jurisprudence. The critical question arises here that will the Indian justice system abandon the human centric pronouncement, will the Indian judiciary stop putting humans first? But The biggest flaw in the old way of thinking is the belief that choosing the environment means sacrificing human development and its integrity! When our courts shift toward ecocentrism and place the living world at the center of a judgment, they aren’t turning their backs on humanity. They are actively saving it. The duality between anthropocentrism and ecocentrism is entirely artificial and superficial. A river or forest does not care about legal status, nature will endure in one form or another, with or without us. What is necessary to understand is that it is our breath, our water security, and our survival that hang in the balance. We need to realize that ecocentrism is not the enemy of human progress; it is the prerequisite for it. It is finally getting absorbed in the judiciary that we cannot survive the destruction of our own life-support system. In the end, saving nature is the only real way to save ourselves.
Author: Pranjali Shukla
2nd Semester Undergraduate Law Student
Faculty of Law, University of Allahabad
References
1Indian Supreme Court first to shift from human-centric to eco-centric approach, says judge – The Economic Times
2 Constitution Day Celebration: Adivasi Members in Constituent Assembly
3 Economic Costs of Rising Sea Levels in Asia and the Pacific | Asian Development Bank4 Visualized: Global CO2 Emissions Through Time (1950–2022)
5India: 2026 Emissions Forecast – Climate Scorecard
6 Bhopal gas leak in pictures: 40 years since the tragedy killed thousands in India 7 M.C. Mehta And Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 20 December, 1986
8 Ecology and equity : the use and abuse of nature in contemporary India : Gadgil, Madhav : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
9 Sundaram, P., & Kumar, R. (2000). ‘Post-Rio Policy Changes in India: A Reflection on Environmental Governance’. Indian Environmental Policy Review, 5(1), 12-28.
10AN UPDATE ON THE CURRENT STATUS OF HOUSE SPARROW, PASSER DOMESTICUS: A BIRD WITH UNCERTAIN FUTURE
11 AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 734
12 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1964392/
13 Jalshakti Report on Pollution in the Ganges
14 M.K. Ranjitsinh vs Union Of India on 21 March, 2024
15 Wildlife Institute of India, 2018 Power-Line Mitigation Measures, Second edition (2020)
16 Man and his destiny | The Voice of Truth | The Selected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
17 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 December, 1996
18 Virendra Gaur And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 24 November, 1994
19 Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union Of India & Ors on 28 August, 1996 20 LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA
21 Suo Motu vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 May, 2009
22 LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA
23 Centre For Envir. Law, Wwf-I vs U O I & Ors on 15 April, 2013
24 Lalit Miglani vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 30 March, 2017
25 Court On Its Own Motion vs The Deputy Commissioner on 10 January, 2018
26 Shree Degray Oran Temple And Oran … vs State Of Rajasthan on 31 January, 2023
