
Plea in SC says Bhopal gas victims are ‘misclassified'
The petition filed by organisations such as the Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Purush Sangharsh Morcha urged the top court to direct the Centre to identify these 'misclassified' victims and classify them correctly under the provisions of the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 so that they receive adequate compensation to cover their medical treatment.
The Centre has termed the Bhopal gas leak tragedy 'the world's largest industrial disaster'. Both the government and the Supreme Court have agreed the loss of innocent lives in the aftermath of the fatal escape of Methyl Isocynate (MIC) gas from the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, on the intervening night of December 2-3, 1984 was 'horrific' in every sense.
Centre's responsibility
'A long history of litigation attempting to recover damages from the U.S.-headquartered Union Carbide Corporation (now part of Dow Chemicals Corporation) ended with the dismissal by the Supreme Court of the curative petitions in July 2023 wherein it was made clear that any shortfall in compensation to be paid to the victims were a responsibility of the Union government,' the petition said.
The organisations said they had data to show that survivors suffering from cancer and kidney failure as a result of toxic gas exposure were classified under the category of 'minor/temporary injury'.
'All these cases ought to have been added as a permanent disability category. Even as far back as in 1974, Union Carbide's internal document, titled MIC Plant Safety Considerations Report, had very clearly stated that in cases of inhalation of MIC 'major residual injury is likely in spite of prompt treatment'... This petition seeks to enforce that responsibility of the Union government, pointing out a certain category of cases in which the damages awarded and paid to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary,' the organisation submitted.
The case was listed for hearing before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai on July 14. However, the Bench did not assemble due to the inavailability of the Chief Justice. The case status shows the next date as July 18. The petitioners are represented by senior advocate S. Muralidhar and advocate Prasanna S.
Focusing the extent of the disaster's impact on public health even decades later, the petition said records of the hospitals run by the government show that 'more than 30 years after the disaster, 95% of the population officially acknowledged to have been exposed to the toxic gas required hospital visits for their medical needs'.
'Data from the Central government-run hospital show that the incidence of heart ailments, neurology disorders, gastro and kidney ailments, psychiatric disorders and other chronic diseases is very high among gas-exposed patients. Records from eight community health units of the ICMR-run Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre [BMHRC] in Bhopal from 1998 to 2016 show that 50.4% of gas-affected patients suffer from cardiovascular problems and 59.6% suffer from pulmonary problems… In 2023 alone 2,06,016 gas victims visited the BMHRC,' the plea submitted.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
8 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Shashi Tharoor challenges Delhi HC's ruling on defamation case over 'scorpion on Shivling' remark
Asking the complainant's lawyer "why be so touchy", the Supreme Court on Friday extended the stay on trial court proceedings against Congress MP Shashi Tharoor in a defamation case filed for his alleged "scorpion on Shivling" remark targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The high court said that prima facie, the remark defamed the prime minister, the BJP as well as its office-bearers and members.(PTI File) A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh passed the order after adjourning the matter on the request of Tharoor's lawyer. The lawyer appearing for the complainant, BJP leader Rajeev Babbar, sought a hearing on a non-miscellaneous day. "What non-miscellaneous day? Why do you want to be so touchy about all this? Let us close all this," the bench said, as it posted the matter for hearing on September 15. Tharoor moved the top court against the Delhi High Court's August 29, 2024, order, which refused to quash the defamation proceedings against him, asking him to appear before the trial court on September 10. Tharoor's counsel previously argued that neither the complainant nor the members of the political party could be called an aggrieved party. The counsel also said that Tharoor's comment was protected under the immunity clause of the defamation law, which stipulates that any statement made in "good faith" is not criminal. Tharoor was stated to have merely made a reference to an article published in the Caravan magazine six years prior to making the statement. The top court had expressed surprise that in 2012, when the article was originally published, the statement was not deemed defamatory. "Eventually, it is a metaphor. I have tried to understand. It refers to the invincibility of the person referred to (Modi). I do not know why somebody has taken objection here," Justice Roy had said earlier. While refusing to quash the proceedings against Tharoor, the high court had said, prima facie, imputations like "scorpion on Shivling" against the prime minister were "despicable and deplorable". It said that prima facie, the remark defamed the prime minister, the BJP as well as its office-bearers and members. The high court also said there was sufficient material before the judicial magistrate for summoning Tharoor under Section 500 (punishment for defamation) of the IPC. The complainant alleged that his religious sentiments were hurt by the Congress leader's remark. In October 2018, Tharoor reportedly claimed that an unnamed RSS leader had compared Modi to "a scorpion sitting on a Shivling". The Congress leader purportedly said it was an "extraordinarily striking metaphor".


News18
18 minutes ago
- News18
Chhattisgarh CM Vishnu Deo Sai Invites PM Modi To Attend 'Amrit Rajat Mahotsav' In Raipur
Chhattisgarh CM Vishnu Deo Sai met PM Modi in New Delhi to discuss state's development. He invited PM Modi to the state's 25th anniversary celebrations on November 1. Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai on Friday met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi. During the courtesy meet, Chhattisgarh's development works and future priorities were discussed. CM Vishnu Deo Sai also invited PM Modi to the celebration of state's 25th anniversary. To mark 25 years since Chhattisgarh was formed, 'Amrit Rajat Mahotsav' will be held in Raipur on November 1. CM Sai shared the pictures of his meeting with PM at the Parliament House and wrote, 'Today, I had a courtesy meeting with the esteemed Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji at the Parliament House, where I apprised him of Chhattisgarh's development works, public welfare schemes, and future priorities." 'On the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the state's formation, I invited the Honorable Prime Minister ji on behalf of the three crore people of Chhattisgarh to the 'Amrit Rajat Mahotsav' to be held in Raipur on November 1. I am confident that his esteemed presence will lend the highest dignity to this historic event," he added. Furthermore, Chhattisgarh CM also discussed initiatives to bring positive changes in the tribal and Naxal affected regions. On Thursday, Chhattisgarh CM met Union Minister of Labour & Employment, Youth Affairs and Sports Mansukh Mandaviya in New Delhi. He discussed key steps to boost sports and healthcare education in Chhattisgarh. As per the PTI report, CM Sai proposed the establishment of 220-bed medical and nursing colleges in Raipur and Bilaspur, aimed at increasing the quality of health education and expanding access to better medical facilities across the state. In response, Union Minister Mandaviya assured that the central government would soon take a positive decision and initiate the process for granting approval. view comments First Published: August 01, 2025, 15:09 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.


United News of India
31 minutes ago
- United News of India
SC quashes FIR against Bengaluru landowners, flags BDA's collusion in land return
New Delhi, Aug 1 (UNI) The Supreme Court quashed the FIR and all criminal proceedings against four Bengaluru landowners accused of cheating and criminal conspiracy in a 2015 land transaction. However, the Court yesterday strongly criticised the conduct of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), observing that it colluded with private parties to return acquired land back into private hands, compromising public interest. A Bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah noted, 'Though the court has allowed the present appeal, the judicial conscience of the Court is ill at ease. The interest of the common citizens, especially of Bengaluru, has been compromised due to various extraneous considerations, including by acts of omission and commission by statutory bodies.' The case stemmed from a complaint filed by one Keerthiraj Shetty, who had entered into an agreement to sell 6 acres of land in Bhoopasandra village, Bangalore North, with the accused on November 30, 2015. Shetty alleged that while the accused received a substantial payment and executed a general power of attorney, they later revoked it and transferred the land internally without completing the sale deed in his favour. Following this, an FIR was registered at Sanjay Nagar Police Station on October 5, 2023, leading to a chargesheet under IPC Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), and 120B (criminal conspiracy). Cognizance was taken by the magistrate on August 30, 2024. The Karnataka High Court had earlier refused to quash the FIR, prompting the present appeal. The Supreme Court found no criminal offence made out in the case. On the charge of breach of trust, it held that the land belonged to the accused and they retained legal ownership, rendering the application of Section 406 inapplicable. Regarding the cheating charge, the Court observed that there was no dishonest intention at the start of the transaction. The complainant himself admitted that cheating allegations arose only after the property's market value increased, negating any claim of initial inducement. 'We do not find any criminal aspect in the allegations ex-facie,' the Court concluded, stating the proceedings were an abuse of the legal process. Accordingly, the FIR, chargesheet, and cognizance order were quashed. Even one co-accused who had not filed an appeal was granted relief, as all accused stood on the same footing. Despite quashing the criminal case, the Court raised serious concerns about how the BDA handled the land's return to private ownership. The land was originally acquired by the BDA in 1978 and 1982. A de-notification in 1992 was challenged and quashed in 1996, and the Supreme Court upheld that quashing in 2015. Yet, in 2015, the present appellants filed fresh writ petitions claiming the acquisition had lapsed. These were allowed by a single judge in 2016, and although the BDA initially filed appeals, it later withdrew them. Calling this sequence of events 'deeply troubling,' the Court said, 'The action of the BDA in not pursuing the appeal(s) filed by itself is the second phase where the course of justice was thwarted. We have no hesitation in saying so, what could only be termed as collusive litigation between the BDA and the appellants.' Though the Court considered invoking Article 142 to undo the 2016 High Court order, it refrained, noting that the BDA has already filed a related appeal in the Supreme Court. It directed that no third-party rights shall be created or acted upon concerning the property until that appeal is resolved. Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Shoeb Alam, along with a legal team from Krishna & Nishani Law Chambers, represented the petitioners. Advocates Mahesh Thakur, Geetanjali Bedi, Ranvijay Singh Chandel, Vedika Singh, and D.L. Chidananda appeared for the respondents. UNI SNG AAB