SHANTI Act, 2025 & Nuclear Liability Debate 

The recent observations by the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, during hearings on the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act, 2025 have brought nuclear liability, energy security, and constitutional balance into focus.

The petition, filed by former IAS officer E.A.S. Sarma, challenges provisions of the SHANTI Act that:

• Allow private and foreign companies to operate nuclear power plants in India

• Cap liability of operators at a low level

• Exempt suppliers from liability

---

⚡ Why Nuclear Energy Matters for India

India’s energy demand is rising due to:

• Industrialisation

• Urbanisation

• Electrification goals

• Climate commitments (Net Zero by 2070)

CJI Surya Kant highlighted a core policy dilemma:

If coal is restricted (climate concerns), forests cannot be compromised, and gas supply is limited — where will the energy come from?

---

🏭 Nuclear Energy in India

Key Operator: Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited

• India currently operates multiple nuclear reactors.

• Nuclear energy contributes around 3–4% of total electricity generation.

• Target: Increase share to reduce fossil fuel dependence.

---

🧾 What is the Core Legal Issue?

1️⃣ Nuclear Liability

Nuclear accidents can have:

• Long-term environmental damage

• Intergenerational health impacts

• Massive financial costs

The controversy revolves around:

Issue	Concern Raised
Operator Liability Cap	Too low
Supplier Liability	Exempted
Private Participation	Risk of profit without responsibility

Critics argue this weakens accountability in case of nuclear accidents.

---

⚖️ Constitutional & Policy Questions

🔹 1. Energy Security vs Public Safety

• Energy is critical for development (Article 21 – Right to Life includes clean environment & safe living).

• But nuclear risk requires strict safeguards.

🔹 2. Federalism

• Nuclear plants affect specific states.

• Local communities bear risks.

🔹 3. Environmental Jurisprudence

• Precautionary Principle

• Polluter Pays Principle

---

🌍 International Context

After the Fukushima nuclear disaster, countries re-evaluated nuclear safety norms.

Some countries:

• Strengthened liability laws

• Imposed strict supplier accountability

India’s move toward private participation reflects global nuclear market trends but raises regulatory questions.

---

📚 UPSC Relevance

🧠 GS Paper II

• Judiciary vs Executive policy domain

• Constitutional validity of economic legislation

• Role of PIL

⚙️ GS Paper III

• Energy security

• Nuclear energy policy

• Environmental safety

• Private sector participation in strategic sectors

📝 Essay Themes

• “Energy Security and Environmental Responsibility”

• “Development vs Safety: Finding the Constitutional Balance”

---

🎯 Balanced Mains Conclusion 

India must pursue nuclear energy to meet its growing power needs and climate commitments. However, such expansion must be accompanied by robust liability frameworks, transparent regulation, and strict accountability mechanisms to ensure that development does not come at the cost of public safety.