Supreme Court and Centre Clash on Stubble-Burning: CJI Advocates Prosecution, Govt Favors Policy Approach

Swift Summary

• The Supreme Court and Union government are at odds over addressing stubble-burning by farmers ahead of the winter season.
• Chief Justice of india (CJI) B.R. Gavai advocated criminal prosecution and even suggested separate legislation, while the Center opposed prosecuting farmers and emphasized a cooperative policy approach.
• Senior advocate Aparajita Singh flagged that despite meaningful efforts and funding by the Centre, stubble-burning persists annually in northern states, worsening air pollution.
• Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued that policy exempts farmers from prosecution under the Commission for Air Quality Management Act, focusing instead on collaboration with them.
• The CJI suggested combining incentives (“carrot”) with penalties (“stick”), emphasizing shared environmental responsibility among all citizens-including farmers.
• Ms. Bhati clarified that government policy was not influenced by vote-bank considerations but intended for effective implementation; a status report will be filed to reflect ground realities in Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh.

[Image Caption: Stubble burning scene in Haryana’s Hisar; image used for representation purposes.]

Indian Opinion Analysis

The debate highlights an ongoing challenge for policymakers balancing environmental protection with agricultural practices essential to India’s economy. Stubble-burning substantially contributes to northern India’s air pollution each year but penalizing farmers without viable alternatives might exacerbate economic strain on rural communities already grappling with systemic issues like lack of machinery access or sufficient government support.

The Supreme Court’s stance underscores urgency for robust solutions that demonstrate accountability while sending a message about shared environmental responsibility. Meanwhile, the government’s preference for collaboration over punitive measures aims to maintain trust among farming communities critical to India’s food security.

A harmonized approach-including education campaigns, subsidies for crop management technology, and targeted enforcement-may offer better outcomes rather than an adversarial strategy alone as hinted at during court deliberations.

Read more: The Hindu