Supreme Court Imposes Nationwide Ban on Mining Within 1 km of Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks
New Delhi | Updates: 02.12.2025
The ruling creates a mandatory eco-sensitive buffer zone around protected forests, aiming to safeguard endangered species and fragile ecosystems from irreversible damage.
In a landmark judgment that is expected to significantly influence India’s environmental governance, the Supreme Court of India has imposed a nationwide ban on all mining activities within a one-kilometre radius of wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. The decision, delivered on 2 December 2025, sets a strong precedent for ecological protection at a time when several sensitive habitats across the country are facing unprecedented pressure from industrial activity, infrastructure expansion, and climate change.
Background of the Judgment
For years, conservation groups, local communities, and environmental researchers have warned that mining operations were inching dangerously close to protected forest areas. Reports indicated that heavy machinery, blasting, transportation noise, and dust pollution were directly disturbing wildlife movement patterns. Critical elephant corridors, tiger routes, and nesting habitats for vulnerable bird species were being fragmented by mining zones.
Taking note of this growing threat, the Supreme Court acknowledged that environmental harm is often “irreversible and beyond the scope of restoration once the ecological balance is disturbed.” The Court emphasised the importance of adopting preventive mechanisms rather than relying only on mitigation or damage-compensation strategies after irreversible harm occurs.
Essence of the Court’s Ruling
The judgment mandates that a minimum one-kilometre Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) must exist around every wildlife sanctuary and national park in the country. Within this zone:
All forms of mining, quarrying, and mineral extraction are strictly prohibited.
No blasting, drilling, or excavation activities may take place.
Heavy trucks and machinery linked to mining cannot operate.
No new commercial construction related to mining can be approved.
The Court further clarified that if a state government has already declared an ESZ larger than one kilometre, the existing buffer zone will remain unchanged. The purpose of the judgment is to establish a mandatory minimum safeguard—not reduce any existing protection.
Significance of the Ruling
India is home to an extraordinary range of biodiversity, but many ecosystems have become fragile due to rapid human expansion. Mining near protected areas leads to various forms of ecological degradation:
Wildlife corridors become fragmented, affecting animal migration.
Tigers, leopards, elephants, and rare bird species face habitat loss.
Forest soils lose fertility due to erosion and contamination.
Rivers and groundwater near mines often become polluted.
The Court stressed that “short-term economic gains cannot outweigh the long-term ecological costs.” Once a forest is destroyed or a river is contaminated, the damage may last for generations—or become permanent.
Economic and Social Considerations
Mining companies argued that the ban could lead to job losses and revenue decline in certain regions. In response, the Court acknowledged the economic concerns but pointed out that environmental destruction ultimately harms local communities the most. Depleted water sources, increased human-animal conflict, reduced agricultural productivity, and frequent forest fires are just a few examples of long-term consequences borne by residents.
The Court suggested that state governments should begin transitioning affected regions toward sustainable livelihood models such as eco-tourism, forest restoration programmes, regulated forest-produce industries, and green entrepreneurship initiatives.
Impact on State Governments and Industries
State authorities will now be required to conduct a detailed review of all ongoing and proposed mining projects located near protected areas. Mines that fall within the one-kilometre prohibited zone must immediately halt operations. Pending approvals for new projects are likely to be cancelled or reassessed under the new guidelines.
Environmentalists believe this will significantly reduce illegal mining and help governments strengthen enforcement mechanisms.
Response from Conservationists and Experts
Wildlife activists and conservation biologists have welcomed the judgment, calling it a “historic step for India’s ecological security.” Experts suggest that the ruling will:
Protect tiger and elephant migration routes
Strengthen buffer zones around wildlife sanctuaries
Reduce noise and dust pollution in forest landscapes
Protect critical wetlands and bird habitats
Provide breathing space for endangered species
Local communities living near forests have also responded positively, noting that mining has long affected their water sources, forests, and farmland.
Long-Term Implications
The Supreme Court’s decision signals a shift toward prioritising ecological preservation over unsustainable industrial growth. In the long run, the judgment is expected to improve forest health, reduce environmental conflicts, and enhance India’s climate resilience. It also underscores the government’s responsibility to safeguard natural resources for future generations.
Ultimately, the ruling makes one message clear: environmental protection is not optional—it is fundamental to India’s survival and sustainable development.
All news content is for informational purposes only. We do not guarantee the accuracy or authenticity of any news item.
LawPGLU