KSLU Solved Question Papers
Environmental Law
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.Com. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 10
2022 Apr (70 marks) Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.Com. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 10 Environmental Law 2022 Apr (70 marks) Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 2 November 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2022 Apr (70 marks) examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2022 Apr (70 marks) examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2022 Apr (70 marks) examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Total marks 70 · 12 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1Discuss criminal law provisions relating to prevention of environmental pollution.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: why the criminal law matters for the environment, beside the special pollution laws; the offences in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (with the old Penal Code numbers): public nuisance and its punishment, negligent spread of infection, fouling public water, making the atmosphere noxious, negligence with poisonous and combustible substances, continuing a nuisance after injunction, and mischief to animals; the preventive remedies in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (removal of public nuisance and urgent orders); the special statutes and their penal and civil sanctions; the leading case (Municipal Council, Ratlam); an assessment of strengths and weaknesses; a conclusion.
Why criminal law matters
Pollution harms the public, not only individuals. The criminal law treats serious harm to public health and safety as an offence against society. It punishes the polluter and gives the Magistrate quick powers to stop the harm. These old remedies existed long before the Water, Air and Environment Protection Acts, and they still work beside them.
Offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
| Offence | BNS | Old Penal Code | Gist and punishment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public nuisance (definition) | 270 | 268 | Any act or illegal omission causing common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to people in the neighbourhood |
| Negligent act likely to spread infection | 271 | 269 | Negligently spreading infection of a disease dangerous to life |
| Fouling water of a public spring or reservoir | 279 | 277 | Corrupting water so it is less fit for ordinary use: up to six months, or fine up to five thousand rupees, or both |
| Offence | BNS | Old Penal Code | Gist and punishment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Making the atmosphere noxious to health | 280 | 278 | Vitiating the air so as to harm the health of people living or working nearby or passing along a public way: fine up to one thousand rupees |
| Negligent conduct with poisonous substance | 286 | 284 | Rash or negligent handling of poison endangering life |
| Public nuisance not otherwise punished | 292 | 290 | Fine up to one thousand rupees |
| Continuing a nuisance after injunction | 293 | 291 | Repeating a nuisance after a lawful order to stop |
| Mischief by killing or poisoning animals | 325 | 428, 429 | Harm to animals and livestock |
These sections reach the dumping of waste in public water, the burning of refuse that fouls the air, and careless handling of hazardous substances.
Preventive remedies under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Removal of public nuisance. A District Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate or Executive Magistrate may order the removal of a public nuisance by a conditional order. This includes unlawful obstruction, trades injurious to health or comfort, and dangerous substances (section 152, formerly section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). If the order is not obeyed, it is made absolute and enforced.
- Urgent cases. A Magistrate may make an immediate order to prevent danger to human health or safety (section 163, formerly section 144).
These are fast, local and cheap remedies. A resident does not need to file a civil suit or wait years for a decree.
The special statutes
The Water Act, 1974, the Air Act, 1981 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 create their own offences and penalties. They punish breach of standards, consent conditions and directions. They also let the Pollution Control Boards and the Central Government issue directions, including closure. After the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, several of these breaches carry monetary penalties imposed by an adjudicating officer instead of imprisonment. The detail must be checked section by section. The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 adds civil relief, restitution and compensation.
The general criminal law and the special statutes work together. The existence of the special Acts does not take away the Magistrate's power to remove a public nuisance.
The leading case
Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Shri Vardhichand, AIR 1980 SC 1622. Residents of a locality in Ratlam complained of open drains, filth and stench caused by the municipality's failure to provide sanitation. The Magistrate ordered the municipality to remove the nuisance, and it pleaded lack of funds. The Supreme Court held that wherever there is a public nuisance, section 133 must be used. The Magistrate's power is a public duty owed to the victims. A municipal council created to protect public health cannot run away from that duty by pleading financial inability.
Assessment
Strengths.
- The remedies are quick and local, and the Magistrate can act on his own.
- Any citizen can set them in motion.
- The threat of prosecution deters polluters.
Weaknesses.
- The fines in the Sanhita are small, such as one thousand rupees for making the air noxious, and do not deter large industries.
- Proving that a particular act caused the harm can be hard.
- Magistrates use their preventive powers unevenly.
Conclusion. The criminal law fights pollution in two ways. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita punishes public nuisance, fouling of public water, making the atmosphere noxious and negligent handling of dangerous substances. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita lets a Magistrate order the removal of a public nuisance. As Ratlam holds, that power is a duty, which neither lack of money nor the special pollution Acts can displace.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.Com. LL.B. Semester 10 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free, and so does the syllabus.
What should we fix or add?
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.