Supreme Court Finds Rajasthan Acted Only Under Judicial Compulsion on Chambal Sand Mining
A Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued sweeping directions on illegal sand mining in the National Chambal Sanctuary, finding State compliance driven by coercion rather than governance.
The Supreme Court, in its continuing suo motu proceedings on illegal sand mining in the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary, delivered a sharp assessment on 26 May 2026: the State of Rajasthan had initiated most of its compliance measures only after the Court required senior officers to appear personally before it. The order, authored by Justice Sandeep Mehta on behalf of a Division Bench also comprising Justice Vikram Nath, reviewed affidavits from Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and the National Highways Authority of India. It issued fresh directions on surveillance infrastructure, unregistered vehicles, staffing vacancies in forest departments, protection of a National Highway bridge over the Chambal River, environmental flows, and the welfare of frontline forest personnel — and listed the matter for 22 July 2026.
How the Proceedings Reached This Stage
The Court had issued directions on 2 April 2026 and 17 April 2026 requiring the three States to operationalise surveillance and enforcement mechanisms against rampant illegal mining within the protected sanctuary. By the order of 14 May 2026, the Court found that compliance remained at a nascent stage. It expressed serious displeasure at Rajasthan's response in particular, recording an “abysmal state of compliance and complete lethargy” in implementing even core directions.
The 14 May order directed the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Principal Secretaries of Mining and Geology, Finance, Forest, and Transport departments of Rajasthan to appear personally before the Court with individual compliance affidavits. The Principal Secretary (Transport) of Madhya Pradesh was similarly directed to appear on the specific issue of unregistered vehicles. The National Highways Authority of India was impleaded as a party respondent and asked to address concerns about illegal excavation near the NH-44 bridge over the Chambal River near the Morena-Dholpur border.
When the matter was taken up on 20 May 2026, all directed officers were present. Rajasthan filed five separate affidavits through its Home, Finance, Forest, Transport, and Mines departments. Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh filed affidavits on unregistered vehicles. The NHAI filed an affidavit on bridge safety. The Amicus Curiae submitted a consolidated note. Two interlocutory applications — one by Conservation Action Trust and one by the Madhya Pradesh Forest Employees Association — were also before the Court.
What the Compliance Affidavits Disclosed
Rajasthan's affidavits disclosed financial approval of approximately Rs. 65.47 crores for IT-enabled surveillance infrastructure by the Forest Department, with a further Rs. 30 lakhs sanctioned for integration with the existing “Abhay Command Centre” programme. Installation of 118 CCTV cameras across five vulnerable routes was proposed. Around 50 cameras on the Dholpur-Agra transportation route were stated to be already operational. Rajasthan Armed Constabulary battalions had been deployed at 40 identified vulnerable locations, and 24 permanent camps and 7 temporary check-posts established.
On enforcement statistics, the Home Department data showed that in Dholpur district alone, 625 FIRs were registered, 630 arrests made, and 688 vehicles seized between 2023 and 2025. In 2026, 105 FIRs, 95 arrests, and 129 vehicle seizures were recorded. The Forest Department separately detected 55 illegal mining cases in 2023-24, 50 in 2024-25, 83 in 2025-26, and 26 in 2026-27. District Level Task Forces were constituted in Dholpur, Sawai Madhopur, Kota, Bundi, and Karauli under the respective District Collectors.
Uttar Pradesh reported that between 1 April and 15 May 2026, the Transport Department in Agra district issued challans to 69 vehicles without High Security Registration Plates, seized or impounded 9 vehicles, and recovered approximately Rs. 1.70 lakhs in compounding fees. In the Agra Commissionerate, 83 cases under the Mining Act were registered from 2021 to 30 April 2026, with 81 chargesheets and 2 final reports filed.
Madhya Pradesh disclosed that approximately 1,641 vehicles were challaned in Morena district during the preceding month, with Rs. 23.55 lakhs recovered in penalties. The State proposed eight static check-points in Bhind, Morena, and Sheopur and sought 30 days for operationalisation. The Court found, however, that the specific issue of vehicles operating without registration number plates had not been comprehensively addressed in the affidavit.
The Court's Finding on Administrative Apathy
While acknowledging that the measures initiated by Rajasthan constituted a step in the correct direction, the Court was direct about their timing. The chronology on record showed that decisions on surveillance infrastructure, enforcement mechanisms, seizure protocols, and inter-departmental coordination were taken only after judicial intervention assumed a coercive and supervisory character. The Court described this as “an apathic administrative tendency which responds to grave environmental and governance issues only upon direct judicial scrutiny and compulsion.”
The Court held that the issues in these proceedings were not isolated regulatory breaches. They concerned continuing ecological destruction, degradation of protected wildlife habitats, organised illegal mining, erosion of public infrastructure, and a serious breakdown of the rule of law in ecologically sensitive regions. The Court invoked Articles 21, 48A, and 51A(g) of the Constitution of India, holding that these provisions cast a continuing duty upon the State to anticipate environmental harm, prevent ecological degradation, and preserve fragile ecosystems through effective governance — not merely in response to judicial orders.
On the specific problem of unregistered and unidentified vehicles and earthmoving machinery, the Court found that the inability of enforcement machinery to identify, trace, or verify vehicle ownership had enabled organised illegal mining networks to operate with impunity. Proposals by the States to deny fuel supply to vehicles without authentic registration particulars were noted, but the Court held that such measures, by themselves, would be wholly insufficient to address the magnitude of the problem.
Staffing Vacancies in Forest Departments
The Court took note of material on record indicating that a significant number of sanctioned posts in the forest departments of the concerned States continued to remain vacant for prolonged periods. It held that effective environmental governance cannot be ensured merely through administrative directions or technological infrastructure in the absence of an adequately staffed field enforcement mechanism. Forest Guards, the Court said, constitute the first and most critical layer of protection against illegal mining and destruction of wildlife habitats.
The Court directed the States to undertake urgent and time-bound measures for filling vacant posts in the Forest Department and allied enforcement agencies, so that the enforcement framework is strengthened both in infrastructure and manpower.
The NH-44 Bridge and NHAI's Obligations
The bridge at Chainage Km. 59+400 to Km. 60+000 on the Morena-Dholpur section of National Highway-44 over the Chambal River was a separate focus of the order. The Central Empowered Committee had verified during inspection that extensive illegal excavation had been carried out in dangerous proximity to, and in certain instances even beneath, the bridge's pillars and supporting structures.
The NHAI's affidavit stated that a preliminary report by the Independent Engineer, M/s L.N. Malviya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. in association with CASTA Engineering Pvt. Ltd., did not reveal any serious structural issue within applicable technical parameters. A joint inspection committee comprising representatives of the NHAI, the Public Works Department, MPRDC, and the Independent Engineer had been constituted. Directions had been issued to the concessionaire, M/s Agra Gwalior Highway Private Limited, for installation of CCTV surveillance infrastructure on the highway section including the bridge area.
The NHAI sought to limit its responsibility to maintenance within the Right of Way, contending that regulation of illegal mining fell primarily within State jurisdiction. The Court rejected this framing. It held that the NHAI, as a statutory authority entrusted with development and management of National Highway infrastructure, cannot absolve itself of responsibility for safeguarding infrastructure from activities posing a foreseeable threat to its safety and structural integrity. The obligation to maintain safe transportation infrastructure, the Court said, necessarily includes a duty to anticipate and address external threats — and cannot be confined to remedial action only after damage has occurred.
The Court also noted that the Central Empowered Committee had found substantial quantities of waste being discarded into the Chambal River from the bridge through gaps in protective railings. Photographic evidence showed accumulation of waste at bridge piers and aquatic wildlife, including crocodiles and muggers, in close proximity to such waste.
Environmental Flows and the De-notification Controversy
The Central Empowered Committee's report dated 7 May 2026 raised the issue of environmental flows in the Chambal River. Scientific assessment by the Wildlife Institute of India indicated a significant reduction in lean-season and summer flows over the last three decades, with discharge levels approaching critically low levels during summer months. The assessment cautioned that further interception or diversion of tributary flows could cause seasonal fragmentation of the river system, with serious consequences for gharials, dolphins, freshwater turtles, and avian species.
The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife, at its 90th meeting on 6 April 2026, had considered these findings in the presence of the Central Water Commission. Both bodies recommended a basin-level assessment involving all relevant stakeholders. The Central Empowered Committee recommended that, pending such assessment, no project adversely affecting ecological flows within the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary should be permitted, except essential drinking water projects where no viable alternative exists.
On the de-notification issue, the Court noted that Rajasthan had sought to de-notify approximately 732 hectares of Sanctuary land under Section 18 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 by a notification dated 23 December 2025, published on 9 March 2026. The Court had stayed this notification by order dated 2 April 2026. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change placed on record its reply dated 19 May 2026, pointing to a Supreme Court order dated 13 November 2000 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 337 of 1995, which directed that no de-reservation of forests, sanctuaries, or national parks shall be effected pending further orders. The MoEF&CC's guidelines of 15 March 2011 require any de-notification proposal, after recommendation by the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife, to be placed before the Court for final approval. The Court directed that this issue would be considered on the next date after parties place their stands on record.
Forest Personnel Welfare: Notice Issued
The Madhya Pradesh Forest Employees Association filed Interlocutory Application No. 143904 of 2026 seeking intervention on behalf of Forest Guards, Forest Rangers, Foresters, and other frontline personnel. The application highlighted hazardous working conditions, incidents of death and fatal injuries while on duty, and the absence of a comprehensive and uniform policy in Madhya Pradesh governing compensation, compassionate appointment, insurance coverage, and welfare measures for families of personnel killed in the line of duty. It also pointed to instances where ex gratia compensation publicly announced by State authorities was allegedly not disbursed.
The Court found that the concerns raised disclosed genuine issues affecting frontline forest personnel and bore direct nexus with the efficacy of enforcement mechanisms in these proceedings. It held that the issues were not confined to Madhya Pradesh alone but appeared pervasive across all concerned States. The Court issued notice in the application and directed Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh to file replies by the next date, specifically disclosing existing policy frameworks on compensation, ex gratia assistance, compassionate appointment, insurance, and welfare measures for forest personnel who suffer death or fatal injuries in the course of duty.
Conservation Action Trust's Interlocutory Application No. 143798 of 2026 was disposed of, with liberty to the Trust to share information, material, inputs, and suggestions with the Amicus Curiae for assisting the Court.
Order
The Court directed the States of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh to furnish fresh status and progress reports on compliance with directions issued on 17 April 2026 and in the present order, covering surveillance infrastructure, enforcement mechanisms, recruitment of field-level personnel, seizure and confiscation proceedings, and action against vehicles and persons involved in illegal mining. The NHAI was directed to file a detailed progress report on installation and operationalisation of surveillance infrastructure around the NH-44 bridge near the Morena-Dholpur border. All reports were to be filed before the next date of hearing. The matter was listed on 22 July 2026 for further consideration.