Calcutta High Court Limits Police Role in Dairy-Farm Disputes
The case concerned a cattle shed, or khatal, operated by a dairy owner whose neighbour had repeatedly complained to the police. The complaints alleged that stored manure, urine and poorly managed slurry were causing health risks and environmental nuisance in the surrounding area.
Police officers investigated the complaints and issued directions intended to restrict or stop the farm’s activities. The operator then petitioned the High Court, arguing that the police action interfered with his constitutional right to pursue a lawful agricultural livelihood.
Justice Jay Sengupta said disputes involving odours, waste discharge and possible disease transmission required technical assessment. The court found that police officers did not have the specialist capacity or statutory authority under the Code of Criminal Procedure to measure biochemical effluent, assess solid-waste compliance or decide whether livestock operations amounted to environmental pollution.
The judgment placed responsibility for such determinations with the West Bengal Pollution Control Board and the relevant municipal or civic body. Those authorities may inspect a cattle shed, apply pollution-control requirements, examine environmental-clearance compliance and establish measures for handling manure and other waste.
Possible measures identified by the court included bio-digesters, covered slurry pits and septic containment. The judgment said that regulatory bodies must address substantive questions about a shed’s operation, licensing or nuisance before punitive closure measures are ordered.
The ruling followed the court’s examination of the statutory division between law enforcement and environmental administration. It held that local police could not independently decide whether a dairy farm was legally operating or whether its alleged pollution and public-health effects had been established.
The case arose amid conflict between a peri-urban dairy operation and neighbouring residents over waste and odour. The judgment addressed the authority of police in such disputes rather than determining, on the facts presented, whether the cattle shed complied with environmental or zoning rules.
