Bhopal Gas Tragedy Waste Disposal : Supreme Court Asks Petitioner To Raise Mercury Leakage Concern Before MP High Court

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition raising concerns over the leakage of mercury from residual ash generated after the incineration of toxic waste lying in the Union Carbide after the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy, asking the petitioner to approach the High Court to seek remedies.

The bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi allowed the petitioner, Bhopal Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahyog Samiti, an organisation of victims of the 1984 Bhopal Gas tragedy, to approach the Madhya Pradesh High Court with material showing the apprehension of mercury leakage. 

The petitioner relied upon a report of Dr Asif Qureshi of IIT Hyderabad, stating that since a huge amount of mercury is present in the incinerated material, there was a risk of contamination of groundwater and the environment around the site of disposal.

Disposing of the petition, the bench observed :

"The appropriate recourse would be to move an application before the High Court, along with supporting material showing apprehension of leakage in the future. Since the High Court has been monitoring the matter for two decades, we request the High Court to consider such application on merits and pass such orders as may be required in the larger public interest."

The bench expressed the hope that the High Court will deal the matter expeditiously.

The petition was filed challenging the order passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on December 10, 2025, allowing the disposal of the waste at the Pithampur

In October 2025, the High Court had rejected the Madhya Pradesh government's proposal to contain toxic residual ash at the Common Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF) at Pithampur in Dhar district, noting that the site was located barely 500 metres from human habitation. However, in December 2025, the High Court kept the direction of October 2025 in abeyance and allowed the disposal of the residue at Pithampur.

Senior Advocate Anand Grover, assisted by Advocate-on-Record Anuj Kapoor, submitted that after the High Court's order, the waste was incinerated and raised concerns over the leakage of mercury from the residue.

Grover said that in 2015, about 15 kilograms of mercury were found in the residual soil. The residue was incinerated following the High Court's order, and a report claimed that there was no mercury at all in the residue. Questioning this report, Grover relied upon a recent research done by Dr Asif Qureshi of IIT Hyderabad, which flagged that mercury was not properly measured in the trial run report. The bench however pointed out that the oversight committee, which is to supervise the process, was yet to respond to Dr Qureshi's report.

Grover submitted that there was mercury in the incinerated residue, which will leach out to the soil. The bench said that the High Court can address this question.

 Justice Bagchi observed, "The report of your expert says the methodology adopted by the oversight committee is faulty and that is why higher concentrations of mercury were not detected. That may be correct or may not be correct. We are not experts to comment on it. However, the other committee says there is no mercury content beyond the permissible limit. Due process requires that the other committee look into it and respond. This deliberation must take place before the High Court."

Grover urged the bench to order that the concrete boxes containing the incinerated residual ash be opened and examined to assess the mercury presence. However, the bench flatly refused, saying that the High Court is monitoring the situation

"If for argument sake it is found that there is mercury. Then what do you propose? You are trying to get indirectly what you cannot get directly," Justice Bagchi said.

"Let the expert committee look into this and give a report on what is to be done if there is a leakage," Justice Bagchi said.

Grover agreed that the petitioner will go back to the High Court, filing such an application. However, he requested that the matter be assigned to another bench. "Not this bench. I am sorry for saying this. This is an unfortunate thing. Then (if it goes back to the same bench), then everything is decided. You go before a particular bench you get an order. This is what is happening. It is unfortunate, I don't want to say much in the open court." Grover submitted.

Concerns Raised In The Petition

The petitioners raised concerns regarding the safety of the Pithampur site, pointing out that the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board had issued a show cause notice in December 2024 alleging toxic seepage from the facility contaminating groundwater sources as close as 50 metres away.

The petition also relied on scientific observations by Dr Qureshi questioning the reliability of the 2025 trial run report on incineration of UCIL waste.

According to the petition, earlier reports by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in 2015 had detected significant mercury levels in the UCIL waste. However, the 2025 trial report claimed that mercury was “not detected”.

The petition argued that the report failed to account for the mercury through a proper mass balance analysis and that additives such as activated carbon and sulphur used during incineration may have trapped mercury in the residual ash.

It was also contended that the testing methodology used in the analysis was unsuitable for detecting mercury, potentially leading to inaccurate conclusions about the safety of the disposal process.

Case : BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH SANGHARSH SAHYOG SAMITI Vs UNION OF INDIA | D No. 8813/2026