The Jharkhand High Court has highlighted serious lapses in the State’s implementation of the ban on plastic carry bags and single-use plastics, finding that corruption, weak enforcement, and deficient infrastructure have rendered the legal prohibition largely ineffective. A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar, took up a public interest litigation filed by Dr. Santanu Kumar Banerjee, which alleged that despite statutory provisions, the ban was not being enforced in any meaningful way. The Court, while hearing the matter, underscored that existing laws alone are insufficient without systemic reforms, robust oversight, and community engagement.
In its order, the Court directed that establishment of monitoring systems be made a priority. It specified that these should be centrally coordinated yet multi-tiered, enabling tracking of enforcement efforts across different levels of governance. The Court also held that penalties for violation must be calibrated to serve as genuine deterrents; they must be sufficiently stringent, with clear timelines for compliance, and immediate action must be taken upon detecting violations. Alongside punitive measures, it stressed that public awareness is crucial: the State should conduct sustained and widespread campaigns through schools, communities, and business associations to educate people about the harmful effects of plastic pollution and encourage behavioral change.
Further, the High Court ordered the State to promote and subsidize alternatives to conventional plastics. Suggestions include facilitating biodegradable bags, cloth bags, and compostable materials to reduce dependence on plastic. The Court also urged consideration of the petitioner’s additional recommendations: promotion of glass and steel bottles, establishing buy-back centres for plastic waste, and mandating large commercial establishments to collect and deliver plastic waste to authorised recyclers. The Court called for political accountability measures, including regular reporting, audits, and transparent disclosures regarding enforcement data. It noted the need for the State to respond to the petitioner’s proposed reforms in detail. The next hearing in the matter was scheduled for October 16, 2025, by which time the respondents have been ordered to file counter-affidavits.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.