ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER HARYANA STATE BOARD FOR PREVENTION AND Vs. JAI BHARAT WOOLLEN FINISHING WORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Haryana State Board for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution (for short, "the Board"), through its Assistant Environmental Engineer, filed a complaint under Sections 43 and 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter called "the Act"), against the partnership concern known as Jai Bharat Woollen Finishing Works, its manager, Subhash Chander, and partner, Smt. Phoola Devi. The accused were tried by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, and were acquitted by judgment dated June 1, 1985. Aggrieved by the acquittal, the Board has preferred this appeal.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the accused were carrying on the job of blanket finishing in Industrial Area, Panipat. The job involves use of chemicals such as soda ash, acids, etc. As a result of the operation carried on by the accused, some effluent is generated containing various chemicals. The said effluent is in the form of water polluted chemically, physically and biologically. The accused had been discharging the said effluent without any treatment at all in the open drain of the municipal drain. The accused failed to obtain the consent of the Board in accordance with the provisions of Sections 25 and 26 of the Act. The Board served a number of notices on the accused to apply for obtaining the requisite consent of the Board, but they paid no heed. On July 31, 1981, the Assistant Environmental Engineer took a sample of the effluent from the outlet of the firm after giving the accused a notice of his intention to have the sample analysed. The notice was served on the accused, Subhash Chander. It was taken according to the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder. The sample was analysed by the Board analysist and as a result thereof, it was found that the sample was not in conformity with I. S. 2490 applicable in this behalf. The Board took a decision dated April 18, 1980, to prosecute the accused. In accordance with the said decision, the aforesaid accused were prosecuted by presenting a complaint.

(3.) AT the trial, the complainant examined R. P. Misra, Assistant Environmental Engineer, PW 1 ; S. C. Mann, Assistant Environmental Chemist, PW 2, and produced a copy of the resolution of the Board for the prosecution of the accused.