SC defers GM mustard hearing to Nov 21; experts say trials may be delayed

The ideal time to sown mustard hybrid for North India is Nov first week

The Supreme Court is likely to hear pleas for a moratorium on the commercial release of genetically modified (GM) mustard on November 21.

The matter was scheduled for Tuesday but was later removed from the cause list; Justice B V Nagarathna orally indicated the next hearing date in court.

Scientists and experts have expressed concern that any inordinate delay in hearing the case could put further trials of DMH-11 under ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) supervision in the slow lane. This is due to the optimal time for planting mustard hybrids, suitable for the main growing regions of north India, ending in the first week of November.

Mustard is a rabi crop, and any sowing done after this period might not yield the desired results, scientists said.

If official trials are not conducted next season, it would mean a gap of one year between the special trials conducted in the 2022 rabi season and the next trials.

On August 29, the Supreme Court deferred consideration of the Centre’s plea for withdrawal of an oral undertaking made to the court in November last year, pledging to maintain the status quo on the release of GM mustard. The undertaking was made before a Bench headed by Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, who has since retired.

Hearing the case on August 29, Additional Solicitor-General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, had said the seeds were already sown in eight of 10 sites. “When this court asked us to not take precipitative action in view of the matter being listed in the following week for final hearing, I gave this assurance. The next sowing season was also one year away. This undertaking was made under these circumstances. We are at the last phase of research. This is not a commercial release, but an environmental release,” Bhati said.

Countering this argument, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for petitioner Aruna Rodrigues had said that environmental release means release into the environment.

Then the Bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan responded by saying: “One year here or there does not matter. This is only one season. Next year there will be another season. However environmental harm cannot be reversed.

The Supreme Court had previously directed for maintaining the status quo on the decision of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) allowing the environmental release of genetically modified mustard for seed production and testing.

 The court is currently hearing separate pleas by Rodrigues and NGO Gene Campaign. They are seeking a moratorium on the release of any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) until there is a comprehensive, transparent and rigorous bio-safety protocol in place.