India’s Rivers in Crisis: CPCB Flags Alarming Organic Pollution

The article is a critical examination of the findings of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) regarding intensive water pollution of rivers, challenges the main line of data, outlines the causes of pollution, and offers suggestions regarding policies that can achieve good governance of water. India's Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has highlighted a crisis of organic pollution in the nation's rivers, with many locations exceeding the acceptable Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) level of 3 mg/l, indicating dangerously high levels of organic waste.

Rivers are influencedby increasing rates of organic pollution; the river systems of India, once regarded as major ecological and even cultural systems, are now being severely challenged. In one of its recent publications, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) records a sharp reduction in the state of water in the entire nation. It is interesting to note that 37 rivers have recorded biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) above 30mg/L, which marks extreme organic loading and undesirable consequences to aquatic ecosystems. This fact highlights a greater systemic crisis in the water governance frameworks, where municipal sewage flows (untreated sewage), industrial effluents, and runoff generated in agriculture continue to flood natural ecosystems. The report not only measures the levels of pollution but also shows systematic inadequacies in wastewater treatment systems, monitoring enforcement systems, and coordination among different agencies. With more than 300 harmful stretches along the rivers all over the country, the information demonstrates the systemic one-sidedness in integrating the environmental protection needs into the urbanisation and demands of industry.

This article makes a critical re-evaluation of the key findings by the CPCB, inquiries into the multi-faceted causal relationships that lead to river pollution, and evaluates the policy and institutional constraints that interfere with successful remediation. Placing the problem in the context of sustainable development and environmental justice, it aims at highlighting the urgency of evidence-based interventions and power-sharing governance policies that would help to re-establish the ecology of the rivers in India.

Alarming BOD Levels and Identification of Critical Stretches

The riverine systems in India are also facing an ever-growing threat due to the increasing organic pollution, as most recent discoveries show by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The identificationof 37 river stretches with biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) level surpassing 30mg/L is a significant violation of set standards of water quality and requires urgent policy actions.

Learning BOD and Its Implications on Ecology
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is one of the critical indices for measuring organic load in the aquatic environment. It shows the amount of oxygen that will be consumed by the heterotrophic microorganisms to mineralise the resources of organic substances that decompose in water. High concentrations of BOD, where the source of BOD is mainly untreated domestic wastewater and industrial discharge, cause precipitation of hypoxia, endangering biodiversity in the aquatic environment. As per CPCB regulations, concentrations over 3 mg/L are termed as deleterious to the water quality, and values over 30 mg/L, as seen in Priority 1 stretches, mean extremely severe plant damage, and this makes the water not fit for any utilitarian use.

Priority River stretch (priority I) identification
According to the CPCB report (2025), river sections that are considered polluted are categorized into five levels of priority defined by the respective BOD levels measured in this section. Priority-I includes the segments in which BOD exceeds 30 mg/litre and consequently reflects the extreme point of the pollution threshold. Thirty-seven of these segments were found in fourteen states, with the largest share of five segments in Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand, followed by Gujarat and Karnataka. Such cases are the Yamuna stretch between Palla and Asgarpur in Delhi, a part of the Sabarmati in Ahmedabad, and from Nagda to the Gandhisagar Dam in Madhya Pradesh.

Spatial Distribution and Regional Trends
A spatial analysis of Priority I segments can make one feel dismayed by an alarming pollution sequence that cuts across the industrialized and the agrarian region. The anthropogenic sewage overload is pronounced in rivers of the north, e.g., the Yamuna and Ramrekha, and in small rivers that are located in the south, e.g., Sarabanga and Tungabhadra. The absolute number of polluted segments in Maharashtra is the largest (54), but not all the segments are ranked as Priority I. Such geographical distribution emphasizes the systemic quality of river pollution, which is a phenomenon divided by geographical and economic borders.

Water Governing Implications
The presence of critically contaminated areas does not fill gaps in the practices of waste management upstream and ecological surveillance downstream. Such observations undermine the effectiveness of remaining river rejuvenation efforts and highlight the need to do basin-wide and comprehensive planning, stricter observation of effluent limits, and the development of sewage treatment facilities.

Other Major Indicators of the CPCB Report

According to the latest examination of the river water quality in India conducted by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), this will offer a multidimensional description of the current trends in pollution across the regions, infrastructural shortcomings, and the regional discrepancies. Along with the most alarmingly high rates of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), the report contains cornerstone information regarding the systemic hindrance faced by the water systems in the country.

Extent and Classification
The evaluation lists 311 polluted river section segments in 24 states and Union Territories, and ranks them in five priority levels based on BOD levels. Priority I implies extreme pollution, whereas the II-V priorities imply less degradation. Most infected areas are found in Maharashtra (54), then in Madhya Pradesh (50) and Bihar (44), with a large amount of contamination in the rural areas outside major industrial regions. Such classification allows concentration of correctional effort and, at the same time highlights the severity of the crisis as a whole.

Poor capacity in the Sewage Treatment
The main conclusion points to the incongruence between the activated generation of waste sludge and the ability to treat sewage. India releases over 72,000 million litres of domestic wastewater (MLD) on a daily basis at a national scale; however, this waste is treated at a relatively low rate of 32,000 MLD. The untreated excess comes into riverine systems straight away and increases the organic and microbial loads. The CPCB also notes that many municipalities do not have a working Sewage Treatment Plant (STP), and the ones that are present are often under-design capacity due to poor maintenance and unavailability of energy resources.

Heavy Metals and Contaminants
In addition to organic pollutants, the analysis reveals that there were traces of heavy metals such as lead, chromium, and mercury in a range of river sources. The metallurgical agents are mostly obtained from industrial effluents, usually in areas with tanning and production of electroplating industries. They are bio-accumulative, which creates chronic causes of harm to aquatic life and humans as health hazards. Besides this, the CPCB focuses on new pollutants, including pharmaceutical residues and microplastic particulates, but quantitative reconnaissance of these products is very limited.

Monitoring and Data Gaps
The report highlights acute weaknesses in water quality surveillance. There are high numbers of river segments that undergo sporadic sampling regimes, with real-time data acquisition being insufficient. According to CPCB, the National Water Quality Monitoring Network should be extended, and digital platforms should be implemented to make life more visible and more open to data. Moreover, there is still no extensive coordination of the urban local governments with pollution control boards and river basin authorities, which is an impediment to integrated management efforts.

Causes of River Pollution in India

River pollution in India is also a complex crisis whose development is driven by a combination of man-made actions, the institutional gap, and environmental oversight. The CPCB report lists a number of structural and behavioural determinants that combine to cause degradation.

Untreated Wastewater and Urban Wastes
Untreated domestic sewage discharge is the ultimate cause of contamination of rivers. The volume of wastewater that is produced actually surpasses 72,000 million litres per day (MLD) in urban centres, but only 32,000 MLD is actually subjected to proper treatment. The remaining effluents that are rich in organic matter, as well as the pathogens, are then released directly into river systems. Cities located along major waterways, such as in the case of Delhi on the Yamuna and Kanpur on the Ganga, do not have enough infrastructure for sewage treatment, which increases the level of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and microbial pollution. CPCB notices that most Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) do not operate or are poorly maintained because of the lack of energy.

Hazardous Discharges and Industrial Effluents
The industrial contamination is a topical motivation, especially in parts of rivers that are close to manufacturing centres. The surface and waste products of textile, chemical, paper, and tanning industries are generally loaded with floods of heavy metals, dyes, and hazardous chemicals. Regulatory enforcement is still weak, despite the existence of regulatory requirements by the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Companies bypass Effluent treatment plants (ETPs) or only treat below the intended capacity. Rivers like the Sabarmati, Damanganga, and the Bhadar are known to have a higher level of chromium, lead, and mercury, and they are associated with long-term ecological and human health risks.

Non-point source pollution and runoff
Agricultural activities are another source of non-point source pollution through runoffs full of fertilizer, pesticides, and animal waste materials. Expansive use of nitrogen and phosphorus-based agrochemicals amounts to eutrophication, algal blooms, and oxygen deprivation in the water ecosystems. This is especially observable in the basins of the Godavari and Krishna rivers, where agriculture mostly occurs on a large scale. In direct contrast to point-source pollution, agricultural runoff is diffuse and harder to control, which requires interventions on a landscape level.

Encroachments, Solid Waste, and Governance Deficits
Indiscriminate dumping of solid wastes as well as encroachment along riverbanks is another case contributing to the deterioration of water quality. The informal settlements usually do not have sufficient sanitation infrastructure, hence end up releasing into the river systems directly. Besides, there exists poor coordination and accountability in fragmented structures of governance, resulting in conflicts between the municipal authorities, pollution control boards, and river basin organisations. To overcome these structural deficiencies, the CPCB underlines the need for systemic gaps that involve the integrated river basin management and decentralised waste-treatment strategies.

Policy Patches and suggestions for reforms

The outcome of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) on the pollution of rivers indicates not only the deterioration of the environment but also the internal flaws of policy and governance as a major cause. To fix these inefficiencies, the action will require system reform, coordination on many levels, and well-founded interventions based on evidence.

Disjointed Institutional Structure
One of the main policy gaps is in the decentralized system of governance dealing with water quality. The sharing of functions between central agencies like CPCB, state pollution control boards, urban local bodies, and river basin authorities leads to a lack of coordination, overlapping, and watered-down accountability. In addition to this, there is an absence of a common river basin management body, which hinders the integrated planning and implementation, especially in the inter-state river basins such as the Ganga and Yamuna.

Poor Monitoring and Insufficient Data
According to the CPCB report, there are high deficiency levels with regard to water quality in terms of monitoring. Many contaminated areas lack a systematic sampling procedure, and close to real-time data collection is still limited. The existing monitoring systems have poor geographical reach and limited technological possibilities. Without the solid data, the tendency towards pollution is either underreported or the policy reactions are either delayed or inappropriate. Adding more mechanisms to the National Water Quality Monitoring Programme with the help of digital platforms and remote-sensing technologies is urgent to provide transparency and make it easier to act on time.

Loopholes in policies
Although several schemes have been implemented, like Namami Gange and AMRUT, the sewage treatment is not satisfactory. Many of the urban centres do not have functional sewage treatment plants (STP), and there is poor control of the management of industrial effluents. The CPCB notices that performance is adversely affected by inefficiencies in operation, even where infrastructure facilities are still present, and a lack of skills. In policy frameworks, the focus is often on the capital investment and denies the importance of long-term operation and maintenance. Decentralization and specifying wastewater treatment and performance-based investment are bound to enhance sustainability.

Remediation Recommendations
To overcome these problems, the report offers a complex solution that encompasses:

• institutional integration involving river basin authorities with statutory mandates to carry out planning and enforcement;
• infrastructure reinforcement by increasing sewage treatment plant (STP) and effluent treatment plant (ETP) coverage,
• prioritization of decentralized systems, and incentive schemes to reutilize treated water;
• imposition of the stricter penalties in the case of non-compliance,
• Implementation of zero liquid discharge of high-pollutant industries and water.

Conclusion

The CPCB survey of riverine pollution testing in India gives a major reflection, illustrating how the state of India has declined in the quality of its aquatic resources and highlights the extensive governance failures. The data recorded 37 river stretches’’ biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), which had a concentration that bordered 30mg/L, which indicated the need for combined policy measures and structural transformation.Besides organic forms of contamination, the investigation identified a high level of heavy metals as well as a shortage of sewage treatment facilities and fragmented monitoring regimes, thus defining a multiplexed crisis with many features. The underlying causes involve untreated urban effluents, leaks by industries, run-offs, and encroachment activities, all of which are embedded in the developmental paradigm in India. Reducing these problems will require a paradigm shift in the management approach of integrated river basin management, decentralised treating facilities, and participatory governance. The strengthening of the institutional capacity, the strict implementation of the regulatory demands, and the accentuation of the communal involvement are inevitable steps in these processes concerning the restoration of the ecological balance and guaranteeing water security. In India, moving towards achieving the goal of sustainable development, the safeguarding of the river systems has to become a priority area in the greater spectrum of thinking regarding environmental planning and health policy.