On March 28, 2025, the Punjab Vidhan Sabha passed a resolution implementing the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 2024, in the state. The process followed standard legislative procedures and did not require any special directive or approval from the Governor or the President. However, this amendment has stirred significant public and environmental concern, as it removes criminal penalties for many pollution-related offenses and replaces them with monetary fines. This shift has raised fears that it could enable industrialists and polluters to escape accountability, especially since the act does not contain strict provisions for legal punishment in cases of environmental damage.
The amendment introduces notable legal changes, the most prominent being the decriminalization of minor environmental offenses. Instead of facing imprisonment, violators now face financial penalties ranging between ₹10,000 and ₹15 lakh. While this may reduce the caseload burdening the judiciary, it also risks weakening the deterrent value of existing pollution laws. Nonetheless, criminal punishment still applies for serious violations under Sections 25 and 26 of the Act, which relate to the unauthorized discharge of pollutants without proper clearance from pollution control authorities.
One of the structural changes in the Act is the appointment of adjudicating officers who are empowered to impose penalties for minor infractions. This move shifts the jurisdiction from criminal courts to administrative officers for such cases. Appeals against these penalty orders must now be directed to the National Green Tribunal. Furthermore, the Central Government holds authority to issue guidelines for obtaining environmental consents and has the discretion to exempt certain categories of industrial plants from mandatory prior approvals, subject to conditions recommended by the Central Pollution Control Board.
This amendment creates confusion regarding its impact on ongoing and pending legal cases. For those still under investigation without formal charges filed, the new monetary penalty framework is likely to apply. In contrast, trials already in progress—where charges have been framed but no conviction has been reached—may now depend on judicial interpretation of whether the lighter, revised penalties should be considered. This uncertainty could lead to inconsistent rulings and enforcement, especially because the amendment does not provide clear transitional guidelines for such cases.
In Punjab, where environmental degradation is already a serious issue, especially concerning water pollution, many activists and citizens are alarmed at the weakening of criminal accountability. The persistent contamination of the Buddha Nullah in Ludhiana is a prominent example of the environmental crisis the state is grappling with. Public protests have intensified over the perceived dilution of environmental protections. Notably, environmentalist and Rajya Sabha member Sant Balbir Singh Seechewal has voiced concerns, urging stronger action to protect Punjab’s water resources and hold polluters accountable.
These developments have led to increasing demands for a Punjab-specific amendment that could tailor environmental protection more closely to the state’s needs. Many experts believe that a balanced framework is needed—one that imposes monetary fines for minor first-time violations but reintroduces imprisonment for repeat or willful offenders. This would strengthen deterrence and address public concerns while still maintaining administrative efficiency. Such an approach could better protect Punjab’s vulnerable rivers, canals, and groundwater systems, which are critical for agriculture and public health.
The amendment also affects the real estate and urban development sectors, particularly in how Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are conducted for integrated townships and housing projects. The new law allows the central government to exempt certain non-polluting industries operating within such townships from obtaining separate State Pollution Control Board consents. Although prior environmental clearance under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, is still mandatory, the regulatory process has been streamlined. Large urban developments with built-up areas exceeding 1.5 lakh square meters (Category B1) may benefit from faster approvals, as duplication in consent processes is reduced.
However, the practical rollout of these exemptions remains uncertain due to the lack of clear notifications specifying which industries qualify. Developers are expected to face a period of transitional confusion while the new system is implemented. Replacing jail terms with fines may simplify compliance, but it could also reduce the seriousness with which some companies treat environmental regulations. This highlights the need for strong post-clearance monitoring and enforcement to ensure that easing procedures does not result in environmental negligence.
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 2024, which received Presidential assent in February 2024 and was adopted by Punjab in March 2025, represents a major policy shift. It reflects a broader national trend toward decriminalization and ease of doing business. However, this change has far-reaching implications for environmental governance in Punjab. By limiting criminal liability and relying on monetary penalties, the law risks reducing the fear of consequences among potential violators. At the same time, it underscores the importance of effective enforcement and judicial vigilance to ensure that this new framework does not lead to environmental degradation or injustice.
While the intent behind the amendment may be administrative efficiency and regulatory reform, its real-world success will ultimately depend on how fairly and firmly it is implemented. Without clear state-level safeguards or additional penalties for egregious pollution, the law could prove inadequate in addressing Punjab’s long-standing environmental challenges. Therefore, this legislation must be closely monitored, and if needed, supplemented by a state-specific law that reestablishes stricter consequences for serious offenders and preserves public trust in environmental protection efforts.