In a significant move that underscores the deteriorating law and order situation regarding environmental protection, the Karnataka High Court has initiated a Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to address the unchecked menace of illegal sand mining across the state’s rivers.

A Division Bench comprising Justice D.K. Singh and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju took notice of the issue following a series of alarming reports in both national and local media. The Court’s decision was primarily triggered by a startling admission of "helplessness" by the State’s Home Minister, G. Parameshwara, on the floor of the Legislative Assembly.

The Court observed that if the very head of the state’s security apparatus feels incapable of tackling the "sand mafia," the citizens of Karnataka are left with little hope for the rule of law.

The foundation of this legal intervention lies in the proceedings of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly. While responding to questions regarding the illegal extraction of sand, Home Minister G. Parameshwara admitted that the trade is a "big racket" involving "influential people" across all political parties.

The Minister’s statement, as recorded in the High Court’s order, painted a grim picture:

"Illegal sand mining is a big racket. I am not giving any explanation or naming anyone, as it is a little embarrassing. I have given only a restricted answer, but it involves many influential people. I will call a meeting to discuss the issue."

The Bench took a stern view of this admission. Justice D.K. Singh, writing the order, remarked: “If the Home Minister of the State feels helpless in taking action to curb the illegal sand mining by mafias, there cannot be any hope that the said illegal activity... can be curbed by the State machinery.”

The High Court’s order highlights a deeper economic conspiracy behind the illegal mining. Reports suggest that while the state government has officially called for bids (tenders) for legal sand extraction, these bids have intentionally been kept unopened.

The Court noted that "big sharks" involved in this money-spinning racket prefer the status quo. If sand mining were legalised through official contracts, the revenue would flow into the State exchequer. By keeping the process illegal, the mafia ensures that thousands of crores remain in their private pockets, completely bypassing state taxes and environmental regulations.

The judicial intervention is not just about revenue loss; it is about the devastating impact on the environment and human lives. The Court highlighted several specific grievances:

Destruction of River Basins: The Krishna River basin is being stripped of its resources continuously at night.
Impact on Agriculture: Farmers in the region have complained that the dust generated from illegal mining and transport settles on their crops, leading to widespread agricultural damage.
Loss of Life: The order noted several deaths caused by overspeeding and unregulated vehicles involved in the sand trade. The lack of CCTV cameras and check posts in these zones has turned them into "lawless strips" where accidents go unrecorded and unpunished.
Threats to Legislators: In a shocking detail, the Court recorded that a woman MLA from Raichur District has faced threats to her life from the sand mafia simply for raising the issue in her constituency.

The Court did not mince words when discussing the existing enforcement mechanisms. While the State has a "Special Task Force" (STF) designed to monitor and prevent illegal mining, the Bench remarked that it has remained functional "only for name sake."

The absence of basic infrastructure, such as monitoring stations and surveillance, suggests a lack of political will to empower the task force, the Court implied.

Given the Home Minister’s admission that the mafia involves influential people from across the political spectrum, the High Court is considering whether the State’s own police can be trusted with a fair investigation.

The Bench indicated that the gravity of the situation might require:

A Court-monitored investigation.
An inquiry by a Central Agency (like the CBI).
A Specially Constituted Investigating Agency or a Special Investigation Team (SIT).

The Bench has officially impleaded the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Mines and Geology, and the Department of Forest and Ecology as respondents in the case.

Key directions from the order dated January 29, 2026:

Notice Issued: Additional Government Advocate Mohammad Jaffar Shah accepted notice on behalf of the State.
Response Timeline: The State government has been directed to file a detailed response within three weeks.
Case Assignment: The matter has been referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court for assignment to the appropriate Bench dealing with Public Interest Litigations.

This Suo Motu action is a classic example of the "Doctrine of Public Trust," which mandates that the State is the trustee of natural resources like rivers and sand, and must protect them for the public. When the executive (the Government) admits it is too "embarrassed" or "helpless" to act against powerful interests, the Judiciary must step in to protect the environment and the rights of the citizens.

The outcome of this PIL could lead to a massive overhaul of how sand is mined in Karnataka, potentially bringing in more transparency and higher penalties for those bypassing the law.

Case Details:

Case Title: In Re: Illegal Sand Mining Across the Rivers in Karnataka v. State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: Writ Petition No. 2938 of 2026 (Suo Motu PIL)
Bench: Justice D.K. Singh and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju
Date of Order: 29.01.2026