The doctrine of strict liability, originating in the English common law case of Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), underwent a transformative evolution in Indian jurisprudence through the landmark judgment of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), wherein the Supreme Court of India propounded the doctrine of absolute liability – a rule without exceptions. This paper critically examines the conceptual distinction between strict liability and absolute liability, traces their historical development in English and Indian law, and analyses their application in the context of environmental crimes in India. The paper further explores the legislative framework governing environmental protection in India, including the Environment Protection Act, 1986, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. Through an analysis of significant judicial pronouncements, the paper evaluates the effectiveness and limitations of these doctrines in addressing contemporary environmental challenges. The study concludes that while absolute liability has strengthened environmental jurisprudence in India, lacunae in enforcement, institutional capacity, and legislative gaps continue to impede its full potential.
Kumar et al. (Thu,) studied this question.