BHOPAL: A district and session court in Bhopal is scheduled to hear on Thursday the jurisdiction issue of the trial against Dow Chemical Company in connection with the criminal case related to the Bhopal gas tragedy.
A member of Bhopal Group for Information and Action (BGIA), one of the petitioners in the case, said the court is likely to hear the final arguments from both sides on jurisdiction issue.
A petition demanding that Dow Chemical be held accountable for the 1984 disaster was filed in 2014 in a Bhopal district court. Since then, Dow Chemical USA has been sent as many as seven summons for appearance in the criminal matter.
Dow Chemical ignored six summons, however, appeared before Bhopal’s trial court in October 2023, for the first time in 17 years. Since their appearance, they have been citing that Indian Courts have no jurisdiction over the American Corp.
Victims of the gas tragedy are demanding that Dow Chemical be held accountable for the 1984 disaster, which killed thousands and caused severe environmental damage.
In the meantime, CBI, the prosecution agency in this matter, is also seeking that Dow Chemical reveal its business integration plan which ascertains the asset amount of Union Carbide that went into Dow.
Dow Chemical, headquartered in Michigan, US, acquired Union Carbide Corporation, whose Bhopal facility was the site of the gas leak on the night of December 2-3, 1984, resulting in the tragedy.
The American multinational corporation has been arguing that the case does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Bhopal court, which had served a show-cause notice to it based on the pleas of the petitioners. However, the gas victims assert that the Madhya Pradesh High Court resolved the jurisdiction issue in 2012, and Dow Chemical should be made an accused in the case.
Notably, the hazardous chemical waste of Bhopal’s Union Carbide factory was shifted for safe disposal at Pithampur in Dhar district on January 1. The incineration process is being carried out by the state government under the supervision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
Comments are closed.