Dumping Foreign Waste on Bharat Mata 'Deshdroh'; 'Waste Colonialism' Must End: Madras High Court

Observing that knowingly dumping foreign municipal waste on "Bharat Mata" is not merely an environmental offence but a direct challenge to India's sovereignty, the Madras High Court has held that such acts could amount to an offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Dismissing a batch of petitions by two paper manufacturers, the bench of Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy refused to permit waste-paper consignments found to contain municipal solid waste to be re-exported to Dubai, a third country, or disposed of within India, directing that they instead be sent back to their countries of origin.

Laying down a broader principle for future cases, court further held that where customs authorities conclude, after investigation, that the illegal import of municipal waste was carried out knowingly and intentionally, they should forward a complaint to the jurisdictional police for prosecution under Section 152 of the BNS.

Court held that India cannot be converted into a disposal destination for foreign waste and described attempts by developed nations to shift such waste to developing countries as a form of "waste colonialism".

Calling such conduct "a more aggravated form of deshdroh", court observed that knowingly importing foreign municipal waste threatens the country's sovereignty, the right to life of its citizens and its ecosystems.

It, however, clarified that prosecution under Section 152 of the BNS would depend on whether the authorities conclude that the act was committed knowingly or purposely.

Imported 'waste paper' found to contain municipal solid waste

Petitioners M/s Sripathi Paper and Boards Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rajarajeswari Krafts Pvt. Ltd., both engaged in manufacturing paper products, had imported consignments declared as waste paper from suppliers in Canada, the United States and Singapore. However, inspections conducted by customs authorities and the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board found that the consignments contained municipal solid waste, including used PET bottles, street sweepings, plastic carry bags, broken glass bottles, waste food paper, beverage cans and other prohibited materials.

Following adjudication proceedings, customs authorities confiscated the consignments, imposed penalties and directed the importers to re-export the waste to the countries of origin at their own cost.

Although the companies accepted the penalties and initially agreed to re-export the consignments, they later approached the high court seeking permission to send the waste to Dubai instead, citing lower transportation costs and communications from the foreign suppliers requesting delivery there. Alternatively, they sought permission to dispose of the waste within India through recycling, cement kilns or waste-to-energy facilities.

Basel Convention, 'Waste colonialism'

Rejecting the plea, the high court held that Rule 15(2) of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 permits only "re-export", meaning the return of illegally imported waste to the country from which it originated, and not export to a third country.

Court relied extensively on India's obligations under the Basel Convention governing transboundary movement of hazardous waste, holding that allowing the consignments to be diverted to Dubai merely because it was commercially convenient would defeat both the Convention and India's domestic regulatory framework.

The high court also rejected the importers' alternative plea to dispose of the waste within India.

Holding that the statutory framework was specifically enacted to prevent India from becoming a destination for foreign waste, court said permitting the consignments to be processed through cement kilns or waste-to-energy facilities would defeat the very object of the law.

"Any such prayer to make this great country as the 'disposal destination' should be held against not only the sovereignty of the country but would be offensive of the basic right to life of every citizen [and] the ecosystems of this country," court observed.

It also noted that India already generates over 1.7 lakh tonnes of municipal solid waste every day and questioned the business model of importing waste paper from abroad when recyclable paper is readily available within the country.

Describing the practice as "waste colonialism", court observed that developed nations often seek to externalise the environmental and social costs of hazardous and municipal waste by shifting it to developing countries.

Such conduct, it said, undermines environmental justice, threatens ecological security and public health, and constitutes a direct affront to India's sovereignty.

Customs confiscation orders upheld

Declining to interfere with the adjudication orders, the high court noted that both companies had accepted the findings recorded by customs authorities, paid the penalties imposed upon them and had not availed the statutory appellate remedy under the Customs Act.

Court found no procedural or legal infirmity in the adjudication orders, which concluded that the consignments had been deliberately misdeclared. It held that the findings had attained finality and therefore did not warrant interference in writ jurisdiction.

The high court also rejected the importers' claims seeking waiver of detention, demurrage and storage charges, holding that importers found guilty of importing prohibited waste could not avoid the consequential financial liability. Accordingly, all seven writ petitions were dismissed.

Case Title: M/s Sripathi Paper and Boards Private Limited v. The Commissioner of Customs and Others along with connected matters

Order Date: June 19, 2026

Bench: Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy