Disposed

Siddharth Singh Rajpoot v. State of Madhya Pradesh

NGT17 Jul 2026Original Application No. 96/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal considered an application regarding the viability of direct milk discharge into the River Narmada. Relying on a Joint Committee Report, the tribunal held that while large milk discharge is environmentally undesirable, no specific law bars ritual offerings. It directed the MP PCB to monitor gatherings and prevent excessive milk pouring in the future.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board to monitor religious gatherings and ensure that large quantities of milk are not offered into the River Narmada in the future.

Siddharth Singh Rajpoot vs State of Madhya Pradesh — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.01

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)

¶3

Original Application No.96/2026(CZ)

¶4

Siddharth Singh Rajpoot & Anr.

¶5

Applicant(s)

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶8

Date of Hearing: 17.07.2026

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR CHATURVEDI, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

For Applicant (s): Mr. Siddharth Singh, Adv.

¶11

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv. for MPPCB

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Joint Committee Report dated 16.07.2026 has been filed by the Respondent No.4-Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, wherein it is mentioned that laboratory dilution study and theoretical dilution assessment, indicate that considering the flowing nature of River Narmada, its high dilution potential, natural assimilative capacity and continuous reaeration, no adverse impact on the river water quality could be established from the available evidence. However, milk is an organic biodegradable substance having oxygen demand, therefore, its direct discharge into any water body in such large quantity is environmentally undesirable.

¶14

Further, it is mentioned that environmental impact of such practices is likely to be more significant in ponds, lakes, reservoirs and other stagnant or low-flow water bodies, where dilution and natural reaeration are comparatively limited.

¶15

¶16

O.A. No.96/2026(CZ) Siddharth Singh Rajpoot & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

¶17

In view of above, the recommendation is made by the Joint Committee that all religious gatherings on the banks of River Narmada should be organized only after obtaining prior permission from the local administration and they should be held only at designated ghats in accordance with the SOP for River-Sensitive Gatherings Along Riverbanks (2024) which is annexed at page no.49 onwards upto 83 of the paper book, with appropriate environmental management measures in place. At designated ghats for such kind of ritual offerings, facilities are already available as permanent features along with separate collection facilities for flowers, coconuts, cloth, and other pooja material. In case of large gatherings/events, the organizers shall, in coordination with the local administration, make additional arrangements as required including adequate facilities for waste collection, sanitation, crowd management, and environmental protection, to prevent adverse impact on the river.

¶18

In the light of the above report of the Joint Committee Report, we are of the view that as of now there is no such existing law which bars the offering of milk during rituals. The SOP which is annexed provides for only permission from the authority for organizing the religious gatherings, but here the question is not that of permission to be granted for religious gathering rather the milk can be offered during a religious ritual. No such law could be shown by the Applicant’s Counsel which bars such kind of offering of milk. However, we are of the view that it should be avoided that such large quantity of milk is poured into the river which might contaminate the water, if the water is found to be stagnant.

¶19

Therefore, we dispose of this application with direction to the Respondent No.4-Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, that they should keep

¶20

¶21

O.A. No.96/2026(CZ) Siddharth Singh Rajpoot & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

¶22

vigil during such religious gatherings and that such large quantity of milk is not offered in future. The Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board shall act in tandem with the local administration in this regard.

¶23

Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶24

Sudhir Kumar Chaturvedi, EM

¶25

17^th July, 2026, Original Application No.96/2026(CZ) AK

¶26

¶27

O.A. No.96/2026(CZ) Siddharth Singh Rajpoot & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

Siddharth Singh Rajpoot v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddharth Singh Rajpoot v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar Kantilal Devre vs Maharasthra Pollution Control Board

Manoranjan Jena vs Orissa State Pollution Control Board

News Item Titled "Two Killed 3 Injured in Firecracker Explosion in Gonda" Appearing in the Times of India Dated 07.10.2024 vs

Resident Welfare Association Village Bhorgarh New Delhi vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Chidipi Nakula Suresh vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Local Residents Muchibazar Bidhan Nagar Road Area vs State of West Bengal

Bablu vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Sunil Kumar Gupta vs Jeetu Gupta

News Item Titled Mumbai Lost Over 21000 Trees in 6 Years to Make Way for Metro Road Projects Appearing in the Indian Express Dated 26.03.2024 vs Central Pollution Control Board

Sureshbhai Jayantibhai Patel (Proprietor of Jay Ambe Mining and Minerals) vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Sureshbhai Jayantibhai Patel (Proprietor of Jay Ambe Mining and Minerals) vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Vijaykumar Karsanbhai Gadhavi vs Union of India

Go Green Foundation Trust vs Union of India

Vijaykumar Karsanbhai Gadhavi vs Union of India