The Supreme Court of India concerning various writ petitions filed in public interest related to the regulation and approval of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in India. It addresses the environmental, legal, and procedural issues surrounding the approval of GM crops, specifically the environmental release of Dhara Mustard Hybrid-11 (DMH-11). The judgment examines whether the approval process adhered to legal standards, considered public health and environmental safety, and respected the precautionary principle and the public trust doctrine. The court's decision is rooted in ensuring that the regulatory framework for GM crops aligns with constitutional and international environmental principles.

Acronyms

A list of acronyms used throughout the document, including terms like AFES (Assessment of Food/Feed and Environmental Safety), Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis), and GEAC (Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee).

Preface

An introduction highlighting the philosophical and ethical considerations of environmental protection, referencing sacred texts and legal precedents.

Bird’s Eye View of the Controversy

A summary of the core issues, focusing on the balance between technological advancements in agriculture and the right to a safe and healthy environment.

Pleadings

Details of the petitions, including:

• Writ Petition (Civil) No.115 of 2004: Filed by Gene Campaign, seeking a moratorium on GM crop approvals until regulatory frameworks are improved.
• Writ Petition (Civil) No.260 of 2005: Similar concerns about GM crop regulations.
• Writ Petition (Civil) No.840 of 2016: Focused on the specific approval of DMH-11 mustard.
• Civil Appeal No.4086 of 2006: An appeal related to GM crop regulations.
• Contempt Petitions: Filed in response to alleged non-compliance with court orders.

Significant Orders Passed by the Court

An overview of notable orders issued by the court in these writ petitions.

Constitution of the Technical Expert Committee (TEC)

Details on the formation and purpose of the TEC to evaluate the safety and regulatory compliance of GM crops.

Final Report of TEC

The findings and recommendations of the TEC regarding GM crop approvals.

Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) Reports

Summaries of reports by PSCs on Agriculture and on Science and Technology, Environment, and Forests, focusing on the impact of GM crops.

Conditional Approval by Government of India for Environmental Release of DMH-11

The government's decision and conditions for the environmental release of DMH-11 mustard.

Sub-Committee Meetings

Discussions and decisions made in various sub-committee meetings related to GM crop approvals.

Interlocutory Applications Filed by the Petitioners

Applications submitted by petitioners during the course of the litigation.

Additional Affidavit of Union of India

An affidavit provided by the Union of India in response to the petitions.

Submissions

Arguments presented by:

• Petitioners: Concerns about the safety, regulatory compliance, and environmental impact of GM crops.
• Respondents: Defense of the approval process and regulatory framework.
• Learned Solicitor General: Legal arguments supporting the government's position.

Points for Consideration

Key legal and factual questions considered by the court.

Legal Framework

An analysis of relevant laws and regulations, including the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the 1989 Rules.

Regulatory Framework

Details of the regulatory mechanisms for GM crops in India.

Constitutional Court and the Environmental Rule of Law

The court's role in upholding environmental laws and principles.

Public Trust Doctrine

Explanation of the doctrine and its application to environmental protection.

Precautionary Principle

Discussion of the principle and its relevance to GM crop approvals.

Analysis and Findings

The court's examination of the issues and evidence presented.

• Re: Point No.1: Legality of GEAC's approval for DMH-11.
• Re: Point No.2: Whether the approval violated the right to a safe and healthy environment.
• Re: Point No.3: Compliance with the precautionary principle.

Conclusion

The court's final decision and directions based on its findings.