Sacred Groves as Forests: Supreme Court Orders Protection of Rajasthan’s Orans in Landmark Judgment (18 December 2024)

Date of the Judgment: 18 December 2024
Citation: 2024 INSC 997
Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., S.V.N. Bhatti, J., Sandeep Mehta, J.
Can sacred groves, integral to India’s cultural and ecological heritage, be legally recognized and protected as forests? The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judgment, addressed this crucial question concerning the ‘Orans’ of Rajasthan. The court has directed the State of Rajasthan to identify, survey, and demarcate these sacred groves as forests under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, emphasizing their ecological and cultural importance. This judgment was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, S.V.N. Bhatti, and Sandeep Mehta, with the majority opinion authored by Justice Sandeep Mehta.

Case Background

The case originates from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in 1995 concerning the conservation of forests across India. In a judgment dated 12 December 1996, the Supreme Court held that the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, applies to all forests, irrespective of their classification. The court directed State Governments to identify forests through expert committees. In compliance, the State of Rajasthan formed the State Level Expert Committee (Kapoor Committee), which submitted its report on 15 April 2004, identifying sacred groves like Orans, Bundhs, and Dev-vans for classification as ‘forests.’ The Kapoor Committee recommended that ‘deemed forests’ should be a compact area of a minimum of 5 hectares with at least 200 naturally growing trees per hectare.

Subsequently, several interlocutory applications were filed, including I.A. No. 1254, praying that sacred groves in Rajasthan be classified as ‘deemed forests.’ The matter was then referred to the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which found the Kapoor Committee’s criteria inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s orders. The CEC recommended classifying sacred groves as ‘forests,’ except for small, fragmented areas difficult to manage. The State of Rajasthan published the Rajasthan State Forest Policy, 2010, laying down guidelines for Orans/Dev-vans. By order dated 3 July 2018, the Supreme Court directed the State of Rajasthan to implement the CEC’s recommendations.

The applicant, Aman Singh, filed I.A. No. 41723 of 2022, seeking directions to the State of Rajasthan to identify, survey, and demarcate sacred groves as ‘forest lands’ under the Forest Conservation Act, and to declare 100 Orans identified in the ‘Oran Atlas of Rajasthan’ as ‘forest lands.’ The State of Rajasthan filed an affidavit on 13 February 2024, stating that numerous Rundhs have been documented as forests, and the process of identifying additional areas is ongoing. The Deputy Conservator of Forests has identified several sacred groves, and the Rajasthan Forest Department has issued a notification expressing its intent to classify these areas as ‘deemed forests.’ Public objections were invited, and once reviewed, the list would be submitted to the State Government for final notification.

The applicant, in a rejoinder, submitted that the State’s affidavit was incomplete, vague, and superficial, as no concrete steps had been taken regarding the identification of Dev-vans/Orans. The applicant highlighted inconsistencies, including the State’s failure to constitute an expert committee to identify desert ecosystems, the allocation or de-notification of some Rundhs, an incomplete district-wise list of Orans, the lack of provisions defining the roles of local communities in the Rajasthan Forest Policy, 2023, and a vague claim about the listing of ‘Shree Degray Mataji’ Oran.

Timeline:

Legal Framework

The judgment references several key legal provisions:

• Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (FC Act): Section 2 of the FC Act restricts the dereservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purposes without prior approval of the Central Government. The Act aims to curb deforestation and maintain ecological balance. As per the judgment, “The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was enacted with a view to check further deforestation which ultimately results in ecological imbalance; and therefore, the provisions made therein for the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith, must apply to all forests irrespective of the nature of ownership or classification thereof.”
• Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (Forest Rights Act): Section 2(a) defines ‘community forest resource’ as customary common forest land. Section 3(1)(i) recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling communities to protect, regenerate, or manage any community forest resource. Section 5(a) empowers these communities to protect wildlife, forests, and biodiversity.
• Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Section 36-C recognizes ‘community reserves,’ allowing State Governments to declare private or community lands as community reserves for protecting wildlife and its habitat.
• Biological Diversity Act, 2002: Section 36(5) obligates the Central Government to protect the knowledge of local people relating to biological diversity. Section 36B(1) obligates the State Government to develop strategies for the conservation of biological diversity.
• National Forest Policy, 1988: The National Forest Policy, 1988, has a statutory flavor and provides for the identification of protected areas, recognition of customary rights over the forest areas, forest conservation with the involvement of the local community, and the need for regular surveys of forest resources.

These legal provisions collectively emphasize the importance of preserving forests, recognizing community rights, and conserving biodiversity, all of which are crucial to the protection of sacred groves.

Arguments

Submissions on behalf of Amicus Curiae:

• The Amicus Curiae argued that sacred groves are essential for linking culture with biodiversity conservation, embodying a grassroots conservation model that integrates cultural traditions with ecological restoration.
• It was submitted that the Rajasthan Forest Policy, 2023, has regressed by omitting specific obligations related to sacred groves, contrasting with the Rajasthan State Forest Policy, 2010, which provided a detailed framework for their protection. The 2010 policy had specific provisions for the protection of Orans/Dev-vans, emphasizing their ecological and cultural significance and provided for district-wise inventory and database preparation, demarcation on the ground and cadastral maps, and formation of committees of local people and trustees for management of these areas.
• The Amicus Curiae highlighted the rights of forest-dwelling communities under the Forest Rights Act, emphasizing their role in protecting and managing community forest resources.
• It was argued that the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, recognizes ‘community reserves’ and that, wherever possible, sacred groves should be recognized and managed as such.
• International laws, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), were cited to support the protection of traditional ecological knowledge and cultural practices.
• The Amicus Curiae suggested that sacred groves should be managed through decentralized, bottom-up governance involving active participation from local communities, that the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) should frame a comprehensive policy for the governance of sacred groves, that identified sacred groves should be classified as ‘forest’ based on their ecological and cultural significance regardless of size, that wherever appropriate, sacred groves should be recognized and managed as ‘community reserves’ under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and that the State of Rajasthan should complete the survey and notification process for sacred groves across all districts within eight months.

Submissions on behalf of the State of Rajasthan:

• The State of Rajasthan submitted that an expert committee was constituted in 2018, and a preliminary identification process was undertaken, with district-wise draft notifications issued to designate Orans, Dev-vans, and other lands as ‘deemed forests.’
• It was stated that public objections to these draft notifications were invited, with a deadline of 03 March 2024, following the preliminary identification and inventory exercise as per the Rajasthan State Forest Policy, 2010.
• The State contended that while the specific language from the Rajasthan State Forest Policy, 2010, was not replicated in the Rajasthan Forest Policy, 2023, the new policy incorporates provisions for Dev-vans/Orans under Clause 6.5.11, emphasizing their identification and management in consultation with local communities.
• The State submitted that an expert committee finalized its recommendations on 07 March 2024, after reviewing public objections regarding deemed forests, and a draft notification has been prepared and sent to the State Government.
• The State submitted that if the Court deems it necessary to include the previous policy’s language, the State is prepared to seek appropriate directions, review the Rajasthan Forest Policy, 2023, and place a revised version before the Court.

Submissions Table

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues in a dedicated section. However, the core issues that the court addressed can be summarized as follows:

1. Whether the sacred groves/Orans of Rajasthan should be classified as ‘forests’ under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980?
2. Whether the State of Rajasthan has complied with the previous directions of the Supreme Court regarding the identification and protection of sacred groves?
3. What should be the framework for governance and management of sacred groves, including community participation?

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following authorities:

Judgment

How each submission made by the Parties was treated by the Court?

How each authority was viewed by the Court?

The Court relied on the precedent set in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India [(1997) 2 SCC 267]* to emphasize that the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, applies to all forests, irrespective of their classification. The Court also followed Orissa Mining Corporation Limited v. Ministry of Environment & Forest & Others [(2013) 6 SCC 476]* to highlight the importance of protecting the customary rights of forest dwellers. The Court further relied on Nature Lovers Movement v. State of Kerala and Others [(2009) 5 SCC 373]* to reflect on Indian society’s commitment to environmental protection. The Court also considered the statutory flavour of the National Forest Policy, 1988 as noted in T.N. Godavarman (87) v. Union of India [(2006) 1 SCC 1]*. The Court also considered the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992* and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)* to emphasize the need to protect traditional ecological knowledge and cultural practices.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was influenced by a combination of factors, including the ecological and cultural significance of sacred groves, the need to protect biodiversity, and the importance of community participation in conservation efforts. The Court recognized that Orans are not merely tracts of land but are deeply interwoven with the spiritual and cultural ethos of local communities. The judgment emphasized the need to preserve these sacred groves for future generations by recognizing them as ‘forests’ under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.

The Court also emphasized the importance of community-driven conservation efforts, drawing inspiration from models like the Piplantri village in Rajasthan, which demonstrates how environmental protection, gender equality, and economic growth can work together to change communities. The Court highlighted that local communities have a strong cultural and ecological commitment to conservation and that their role as custodians should be formally recognized.

Fact:Law Ratio

Logical Reasoning

Key Takeaways

• Recognition of Sacred Groves: The Supreme Court has directed that sacred groves, such as Orans in Rajasthan, must be recognized as ‘forests’ under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
• Community Participation: The judgment emphasizes the importance of involving local communities in the management and conservation of these sacred groves.
• Protection under Wildlife Act: The Court recommended that sacred groves be granted protection under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, as community reserves.
• Policy Review: The Court directed the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to create a comprehensive policy for the governance and management of sacred groves across the country.
• Expert Committee: A 5-member committee will be constituted to ensure compliance with the directions.

Directions

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

• The State of Rajasthan is directed to complete the survey and notification of sacred groves/Orans in all districts.
• The Forest Department must carry out detailed on-ground mapping of the identified groves and classify them as ‘forests.’
• The classification should not depend on the size or extent of the groves but solely on their purpose and their cultural and ecological significance.
• Sacred groves/Orans should be identified and, where appropriate, declared as community reserves under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
• The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change of India (MoEFCC), in collaboration with the Forest Department, Government of Rajasthan, shall constitute a 5-member Committee to ensure compliance with the directions.

Development of Law

This judgment reinforces the interpretation of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, to include all areas that function as forests, irrespective of their size or formal classification. It also recognizes the importance of community-based conservation and integrates the principles of various environmental laws to protect sacred groves. The judgment also highlights the need for a national policy on sacred groves, which is a significant step towards their recognition and protection.

Ratio Decidendi: Sacred groves, due to their ecological and cultural significance, must be classified as ‘forests’ under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and managed with the active participation of local communities. This judgment clarifies that the term ‘forest’ has to be understood in its dictionary sense and includes any area recorded as forest in the Government record irrespective of the ownership.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in the T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad case marks a significant step towards the protection of sacred groves in Rajasthan. By directing the State to classify Orans as ‘forests’ and emphasizing community participation, the Court has upheld the ecological and cultural significance of these areas. The judgment also sets a precedent for the protection of sacred groves across India, highlighting the need for a national policy and community-based conservation efforts. This ruling ensures the preservation of these vital ecosystems for future generations.