Editorial

The euphoria of the tournament opener now feels like a distant memory. Following a comprehensive and frankly concerning defeat at the hands of South Africa in the Super Eights, Team India’s campaign in the T20 World Cup 2026 is officially teetering on the edge of the precipice. What was anticipated as a smooth sail towards the semi-finals has instead become a desperate struggle for survival, leaving fans and pundits alike to ponder a question that was unthinkable just days ago: Is this where the journey ends? The loss to the Proteas was more than just a blemish on the points table; it was a stark revelation of underlying frailties. Chasing a competitive total, the much-vaunted Indian batting lineup imploded. It wasn't merely the loss of wickets, but the manner of the dismissals—a chaotic mix of reckless aggression and technical lapses against quality pace and spin—that has triggered alarm bells. On a pitch where batsmanship was at a premium, the team’s shot selection bordered on the irresponsible, undoing the solid foundation laid by the bowlers earlier in the evening. This "major setback," as described by officials, has thrown the group wide open. The mathematics are simple yet brutal: India’s fate is no longer entirely in their own hands. They must now produce a flawless, commanding performance in their remaining group matches and hope other results fall their way. The margin for error, already slim in a World Cup, has vanished entirely. The dressing room, once a picture of calm confidence, now faces its first real test of character under immense pressure. For a nation that lives and breathes cricket, this is a moment of profound anxiety. The sky-high expectations that accompany the Men in Blue are a burden, but they are also a testament to the team's inherent talent. That very talent now stands accused of not rising to the occasion. The upcoming matches are no longer just games; they are a referendum on this team’s mental fortitude. Yet, in the darkest hour lies the greatest opportunity for redemption. Indian cricket has a storied history of dramatic turnarounds. The path to the semi-finals is now a steep climb, but not an impossible one. It demands a collective raising of the game: the senior pros must anchor the innings, the bowlers must strike early, and the fielding must be electric. The nation watches with bated breath. The time for introspection is over. It is now a test of nerve, skill, and belief. For Rohit Sharma and his men, the fight to save their World Cup campaign begins now—a fight they cannot afford to lose.

The recent move of the Supreme Court of India seeking a response from the Government of India on relocating coal-based industries from the National Capital Region (NCR) marks yet another significant step in the judiciary’s sustained engagement with India’s air pollution crisis. The direction reflects a growing impatience with incremental measures and signals a shift toward structural solutions.

For years, Delhi and its surrounding NCR districts have grappled with hazardous air quality, especially during winter. Despite regulatory interventions—ranging from graded response action plans to temporary construction bans—pollution levels routinely breach safe limits. Coal-based industries, particularly brick kilns and small manufacturing units operating in NCR’s industrial clusters, contribute significantly to particulate matter emissions. Their continued presence in densely populated regions raises serious public health concerns.

The Court’s scrutiny underscores a broader constitutional principle: the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to a clean and healthy environment. Judicial activism in environmental matters is not new; however, the present move appears more systemic than episodic. Instead of seasonal firefighting, the Court seems to be probing whether pollution-intensive industries should continue operating in ecologically stressed urban belts at all.

Relocating coal-based units outside NCR could yield tangible benefits. It may reduce ambient PM2.5 and PM10 levels, ease pressure on urban healthcare systems, and complement the transition toward cleaner fuels. At the same time, the economic implications cannot be ignored. Thousands of workers depend on these industries. Abrupt relocation without a rehabilitation framework risks social dislocation and economic distress.

The Centre’s response will therefore be crucial. A balanced approach must combine environmental imperatives with economic realism. Policy options could include phased relocation, financial incentives for cleaner technology adoption, stricter emission standards, and support for affected workers. Transitioning to natural gas or renewable energy-based systems may offer a middle path where immediate displacement is neither feasible nor just.

Importantly, judicial oversight should catalyze executive action rather than substitute for it. Environmental governance ultimately requires coherent policy, inter-state coordination, and sustained enforcement—not merely courtroom directives. NCR pollution is a multi-source problem involving vehicular emissions, crop residue burning, construction dust, and industrial activity. Isolating one sector without a comprehensive roadmap may deliver limited gains.

Nevertheless, the Court’s intervention reinforces a vital message: environmental degradation is no longer a peripheral issue but a constitutional and public health emergency. If this moment leads to a structured transition toward cleaner industrial practices, it could mark a turning point in India’s urban environmental policy. The challenge lies in converting judicial concern into durable reform.

• SAS Kirmani