After over 40 years since the occurrence of Bhopal Gas Disaster in December 1984, the Madhya Pradesh administration, albeit on the strict directions of the High Court, initiated final steps to incinerate and dispose the hazardous waste of the M/s Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL) Bhopal plant in Pithampur, Dhar district, as its ultimate graveyard.
The waste comprises 359 Metric Tonnes (MT) of contaminated soil, Sevin residue, semi-processed pesticide and lime sludge that had been recovered and stored at the UCIL premises in Bhopal in 2005. A NEERI report states that the total quantum of contaminated soil amounts to 11 lakh MT.
Previously, in 2015 the state government had incinerated toxic waste weighing 10 MT in Pithampur as part of the trial run on the directions of the Supreme Court. The results of the previous trial were documented terming it successful. While locals claimed that the incineration facility had adversely impacted them, with contamination of local water bodies and the groundwater. It was after this trial that SC had first issued directions for the incineration of remaining waste in Pithampur. However, the unending delays on the part of the administration perturbed the judicial bodies.
On 3 December 2024, the Madhya Pradesh High Court pulled up the Bhopal Gas Tragedy Relief and Rehabilitation (BGTRR) Department of the Madhya Pradesh government for inaction in getting rid of the waste that had been sitting in the factory premises for over 40 years. Following which, the state government started to execute its plan for safe transportation, and disposal of the remaining waste in scientific manner at an incinerator facility in Pithampur, technically called a Treatment-Storage-Disposal Facility (TSDF). The High Court on 3 December 2024 set a four weeks deadline for the state government to initiate removal and transfer of the remaining waste.
The remaining 337 MT waste was shifted from Bhopal to Pithampur in January 2025 amidst clouds of grave concerns by local people who fear that the incineration of waste may lead to health hazardous and life-threatening consequences for generations in the region. On 3 January 2025, protest erupted in the town with incidents of stone pelting, while two people attempted self-immolation.
The protest was supported by Pithampur Bachao Samiti, which had been vocal about lack of trust in the entire disposal process, stating that people are being misled on waste disposal. The residents of Pithampur and activists fear that improper disposal of waste could risk turning their village into ‘another Bhopal’. Additionally, incidents of misinformation were also reported in January 2025, leading to registration of FIRs against the miscreants and three people being arrested.
During initiation of trial for disposal of waste, the local groups alleged that the MP Pollution Control Board (MPPCB) failed to provide complete report regarding the process.
After pacification and dispelling of misinformation, the 337 MT of toxic waste was incinerated scientifically in batches over a period of 55 days under high-level monitoring and supervision of the authorities, including by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and MPPCB.
Later this year, it was revealed that the affidavits filed by the state government and CPCB before the High Court, reflected disparate numbers relating to the quantity of heavy metals including mercury in the residual ash. The HC is adjudicating the issue of disposal of waste, with separate petitions filed by residents of Pithampur and Indore claiming environmental harm and concerns over after-effects such disposal may have on the region.
Despite findings of the mercury levels being on the lower side by MPPCB vis-à-vis the joint findings of CPCB-NEERI, MPPCB report in August 2025 concluded that the levels were still higher than the permissible limits. As a result, the residual ash, which is claimed to have been generated to the staggering quantity of 900 MT was revealed to be highly toxic in nature.
The residual ash is to be contained in a landfill cell, by covering the ash with a two-layer membrane and then burying the same in the containment facility. The landfill cell, as proposed, is in proximity of villages of Tarpura, Chirakhan and Bajrangpura, where roughly around 15,000 people reside. Additionally, the site is also close to the industrial area where significant number of wage workers are engaged.
Taking stringent view of the discrepancies and presence of heavy metals, the HC while examining the issue of location of containment facility, expressed anguish over the present underground facility and gave voice to the concerns regarding accidental leakage of residue. In a strongly worded order on 8 October 2025, the HC remarked that in times when the state has been unable to provide reliable roads and bridges, “reposing unflinching faith in the engineering prowess of the state maybe an invitation to disaster.”
The HC disapproved the containment site as proposed by the state, holding that the containment site is in proximity to human habitation. The HC has directed the state authorities to submit a report citing alternate sites for containment.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Opposition against environmental degradation
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand to stop disposal of hazardous waste of UCIL and identify alternate sites for disposal of waste.
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common and Private
Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
3
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023
223, 351(1)
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Project underway despite protests
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Yes
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Other environmental services, Grazing, Water bodies, Agricultural land, Residential area
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
126
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
2024
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Environmental Law, Environmental Law
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Violation of environmental laws
Non-consultation with stakeholders
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Pending
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur
Case Number
W.P. No. 2802 of 2004
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Arrest/detention/imprisonment
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023
Reported Details of the Violation:
On 3 January 2025, stone-pelting incidents were reported on temporary Police Chowki by 30-40 protesters demanding cancellation of disposal of waste in Pithampur. An FIR was registered against unnamed protesters. Another FIR was registered which stated that two individuals attempted self-immolation near Maharana Pratap Bus Stand at around 02:30 PM. Thereafter, multiple FIRs reported over protests held by 30-40 protesters, stating blockade caused to public road and damage to property caused. The protests escalated as police resorted to lathi charge to disperse the crowd. Over a course of 2-3 days, various FIRs were also registered for dissemination of misinformation and as per reports, three people were arrested.
Date of Violation
January 2, 2025
Location of Violation
Temporary Police Chowki, Ramky Company, Pithampur
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change; Central Pollution Control Board; State of Madhya Pradesh Madhya; Pradesh Pollution Control Board; Indore Divisional Commissioner; Department of Gas Tragedy Relief and Rehabilitation
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
No
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
M/s Madhya Pradesh Waste Management Project, RE Sustainability Limited (Formerly known as Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd.)
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
No
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Pithampur Bachao Samiti; Pithampur Audhyogik Sangathan; Bhopal Group for Information and Action
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
3
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023
223, 351(1)
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?







