V. no. In 2010, the then Chief Court decided to ban the cutting of not only government forests, but private forests as well, saying that cutting down forests would lead to water shortages. The decision made in favor of environmental protection was historic.

In the same year, the Chief Court sentenced 9 people to 6/6 months imprisonment in two separate incidents of killing fishers by exploding bombs in the Tinau river of Lumbini . Both decisions were made by the then Chief Justice Hariprasad Pradhan's bench. First, five people including Ganga Bahadur Gurung and in another case four people including Budhilal Guvaju were sentenced to imprisonment. 

This decision made by the court to protect the environment was discussed in Pokhara on Saturday. The participants in the opening of the two-day workshop seminar on the judicial approach to environment and wildlife protection issues, which was organized by the National Nature Conservation Fund and the Judge Society of Nepal, remembered the decision. 

Chief Justice Prakashmansingh Raut said that Nepal's courts have done exemplary practice in the world in favor of environmental protection. "Judicial jurisprudence on conservation is not a small thing," he said, "the judicial view of the court that there will be no water in the year 2010 and the world will be different should not be considered otherwise and that line is still intact today."

Supreme Court in 2052 He said that the decision in the case of Godavari marble industry and the directive order given to the government forced the government to enact laws related to environmental protection. Three decades ago, at the foot of Phulchoki Hill in Lalitpur, the marble industry used to quarry stone.

In the year 2049, a writ was filed in the Supreme Court saying that the water, land and air were polluted by the mining and it made human life unsafe. Hearing the writ in 2052, the bench of Justices Trilok Pratap Rana, Lakshman Prasad Aryal and Govinda Prasad Shrestha issued a directive order to make a law with provisions for environmental crimes and punishments. Even though the 'Mining Act, 2042' was enacted at that time, it was not implemented. It was also ordered in this judgment to implement the said Act . Acts and regulations related to environmental protection have been made during the implementation of the decision.

Chief Justice Raut said that it will not be difficult for the court to make a decision as the Constitution itself has placed the environment as a fundamental right. "Talking about the environment is not anti-development, the responsibility set by the constitution must be protected and promoted by all elements of the state with integrity," he said, "It is important for us to understand the meaning of the instructions given by the basic law of the state." We don't have to worry if they call us anti-development.' 

Saying that the court will do its part in environmental protection, he said that it is the duty of politicians and employees to match it with good governance. If you want to cut down trees in Chitwan National Park and build an airport, it will be done. What will happen if the things given by nature are gradually being finished?, he said, 'while the world is under the grip of global warming, in countries like ours where we are not self-sufficient, the judiciary should do what is our legal duty to protect and promote the gifts given by nature. Together we will not miss .' 

Forest and Environment Minister Ain Bahadur Shahi Thakuri stated that the government is implementing the decisions made by the court regarding forest and environmental issues and mentioned that environmental protection is a common responsibility of all. He, who is also the chairman of the Nature Conservation Fund, said that he will do significant work in environmental justice. He said, "I am confident that by analyzing the existing challenges and opportunities of environmental justice from the policy to the implementation level, and especially to the judicial sector, we will be able to draw a clear roadmap for the future." He expressed the statement that it is necessary to have the same understanding in all parts of the state on these issues when going through a crisis.  

Sapna Pradhan Malla, the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court as the 'key note speaker', said that Nepal is at high risk as it is among the developed industrialized nations. She requested that the Environmental Study Report (EIA) should not be taken for granted as the court considers it as a serious document. "Environment should not be damaged during conservation and consumption," she said, "Ecologically sustainable environment should be created."

Former Chief Justice Meen Bahadur Rayamazhi insisted on conducting justice based on principles.

General Secretary of the Judges Association Teknarayan Kunwar, President of the Special Court, stating that wildlife crime is the fourth largest organized crime in the world. He discussed that recently there was a conference at the International Court of Justice in The Hague and Nepal raised the issue of climate justice.

Forest Secretary Deepak Kharal said that he was accused of being anti-development while doing conservation work. He said that the existing criminal offense code has created a legal confusion as only the representative of the central government can prosecute the case and not the divisional forest officer of the state government.

Forest and Environment Minister of Gandaki Province, Bhesha Bahadur Paudel, said that there is a need for justice from the grassroots level in the environment sector and demanded that the forest sector be given to the province. Dhanraj Acharya, head of Pokhara Metropolitan Municipality, insisted that a country like Nepal should get climate compensation as it has to suffer the effects of climate change when other countries emit emissions.