Question

According to Environmental (Protection) Act of 1986 "environmental pollutant" means

• A. any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment;
• B. any substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment
• C. any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to a person
• D. any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to the society

Hint:

When studying any statute, pay close attention to the 'Definitions' section (usually Section 2). The specific wording of definitions is crucial as it clarifies the scope and meaning of key terms used throughout the Act and is a common source for questions.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

This is a straight definition question from Section 2(b) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, so the check is simple: does the option's wording match the section exactly.

1. Option A: any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment reads exactly like the statute, listing all three physical forms and naming the environment as the thing harmed.
2. Option B: drops solid, liquid or gaseous and just says any substance. The Act is more precise than that, so this is a loose paraphrase, not the actual clause.
3. Option C: keeps the physical-state list but says injurious to a person instead of to environment, narrowing the definition in a way the Act does not.
4. Option D: same mistake as option C, just using the society instead of a person.

Only option A is the unaltered statutory text, so the correct answer is any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment.

Answer 2

Instead of just matching text, it helps to think about why the Environment (Protection) Act defines environment so broadly in the first place, and then ask which option is consistent with that scheme.

1. Any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment: The Act defines environment in Section 2(a) as including water, air, land, and the relationships among them and living beings. A pollutant under Section 2(b) is deliberately tied to this same broad idea of environment, and covers any physical form of matter, solid, liquid, or gas, that can harm it. This option fits that scheme exactly.
2. Any substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment: This keeps the link to environment but loses the precision about physical form. Since air pollution, water pollution and land contamination each involve different physical states of matter, the Act specifically lists all three forms rather than using the vaguer word substance alone, so this version understates what the statute actually says.
3. Any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to a person: If a pollutant were defined only by harm to a person, the Act would effectively become a public health law rather than an environmental law, and would not justify regulating harm to forests, rivers or wildlife where no person is directly injured. That is inconsistent with how the rest of the Act is structured.
4. Any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to the society: Society is not a term the Act defines or uses elsewhere, and it would be an unusually vague basis for a pollution-control statute compared with the concrete, already defined term environment.

Only the first option stays true to how the Act frames both environment and pollutant together.

Therefore, the correct answer is any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment.