http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 37  

CASE NO.: Writ Petition (civil)  72 of 1998

PETITIONER: In Re:   Noise Pollution \026 Restricting use of loudspeakers

RESPONDENT: ................

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/07/2005

BENCH: CJI R.C. LAHOTI & ASHOK BHAN

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T Implementation of the Laws for restricting use of loudspeakers and high volume  producing sound systems WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO.                    OF 2005  [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 21851/2003] Forum, Prevention of Envn. & Sound Pollution            \005Appellant

Versus

Union of India & Anr.                                                \005Respondents

R.C. Lahoti, CJI

       These two matters before us raise certain issues of far- reaching implications in day-to-day life of the people in India  relatable to noise pollution vis-a-vis right to life enshrined in Article  21 of the Constitution as interpreted in its wide sweep by the  constitutional courts of the country.  Though a limited grievance  was raised to begin with but several intervenors and interlocutory  applications enhanced the scope of hearing and the cases were  heard in a very wide perspective centering around Article 21 of the  Constitution.  Several associated and incidental issues have also  been gone into.

Facts in W.P.(C) No.72/98         CWP No. 72/98 is filed by Shri Anil K. Mittal, an engineer by  profession moving the Court pro bono publico.  The immediate  provocation for filing the petition was that a 13 year old girl was a  victim of rape (as reported in newspapers of January 3, 1998).  Her  cries for help sunk and went unheard due to blaring noise of music  over loudspeaker in the neighbourhood.  The victim girl, later in the  evening, set herself ablaze and died of 100% burn injuries.  The  petition complains of noise created by the use of the loudspeakers  being used in religious performances or singing bhajans and the like  in busy commercial localities on the days of weekly offs.  Best  quality hi-fi audio systems are used.  Open space, meant for use by  the schools in the locality, is let out for use in marriage functions  and parties wherein merry making goes on with hi-fi amplifiers and  loudspeakers without any regard to timings.  Modern residents of  the locality organize terrace parties for socializing and use high  capacity stereo systems in abundance.  These are a few instances  of noise pollution generated much to the chagrin of students taking  examinations who find it utterly difficult to concentrate on studies

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 37  

before and during examinations.  The noise polluters have no  regard for the inconvenience and discomfort of the people in the  vicinity.  Noise pollution has had its victims in the past and  continues to have victims today as well.  The petitioner seeks to  invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court so that there may not be  victims of noise pollution in future.  The principal prayer is that the  existing laws for restricting the use of loudspeakers and other high  volume noise producing audio-video systems, be directed to be  rigorously enforced.

Facts in C.A. No.         of 2005 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C)  No.21851/03)

Leave granted.

       The Government of India framed and published Noise  Pollution Control and Regulation Rules, 1999.  On 11.10.2002 the  Government of India brought in an amendment in the Rules.  The  amendment empowered the State Government to permit use of  loudspeaker or public address system during night hours (between  10 pm and 12 pm mid-night) on or during the cultural or religious  occasions for a limited period not exceeding 15 days.  Vires of this  amendment were put in issue by the appellant submitting that the  provision is not accompanied by any guidelines and is capable of  being misused to such an extent that the whole purpose behind  enacting the Rules itself may be defeated.  The High Court of Kerala  found the petition devoid of any merit and directed the petition to  be dismissed.  Feeling aggrieved, this petition has been filed by  special leave.

       The special leave petition and, in particular, the writ petition  raise issues of wide ranging dimensions relating to noise pollution  and the implications thereof.  Taking cognizance of the matters as  public interest litigation, the Court vide its order dated 6.4.98,  directed the cause title of the petition filed by Shri Anil Kumar Mittal  to be amended as "In re. Noise Pollution\027Implementation of the  Laws for Restricting Voice of Loudspeakers and High Volume  Producing Sound System".  The Court also appointed Shri Jitender  Sharma, Senior Advocate and Shri Pankaj Kalra, Advocate to  appear as Amicus Curiae.  Both the learned counsel were present in  the Court and accepted the assignment.  Unfortunately, Shri Pankaj  Kalra, Advocate expired during the pendency of the proceedings.   Shri Sandeep Narayan, Advocate has appeared in his place and  assisted the Court.

       The Union of India and the Central Pollution Control Board  have not opposed the prayer made in the writ petition and the  appeal and have rather supported the writ petitioner.  Valuable  inputs have been provided by the Central Pollution Control Board in  the form of pleadings, authentic publications, research documents  and other papers.  The Union of India, while not opposing the relief  sought for by the petitioner, has pointed out several practical  difficulties in completely regulating and where necessary,  eliminating noise pollution.

       Though, as we have already noted, the sweep of hearing in  these matters has been very wide, the principal thrust of the writ  petitioner and the learned Amicus has been directed towards noise  created by firecrackers, loudspeakers used __  by political parties, at  religious places and on religious and social occasions or festivals.    Hindu Bokta Jana Sabai, Tamil Nadu Fireworks and Amorces  Manufacturers Association, Universal Society Performance, All India  Federation of Fireworks Association, Indian Fireworks Manufacturers

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 37  

Association and some individuals have sought for interventions.  It  is not necessary to notice the contents of the intervention  applications in detail.  Suffice it to say that the reliefs sought for in  the applications are conflicting.  Some of the intervenors have  sought for:- (i)     noise created by horns of engines, pressure horns in  automobiles, loudspeakers, denting painting of cars,  particularly, in residential areas and from unauthorized  premises being prohibited;

(ii)    use of loudspeakers in religious places such as temples,  mosque, churches, gurudwaras and other places being  discontinued or at least regulated;

(iii)   firecrackers burst during Diwali festival and on other  occasions for fun or merry making being prohibited  completely, if the noise created exceeds certain decibels and  being so regulated as to prevent bursting during night hours.   

Other set of intervenors seeks such like reliefs:- (i)     granting exemption in favour of bursting of firecrackers  on or during festivals without regard to the limit of time as  such bursting of firecrackers is associated with the  performance of ceremonies relating to religion or social  occasions;

(ii)    laying down mechanism for regulating the very  manufacturing of firecrackers so that such firecrackers as  unreasonably enhance noise pollution may be kept away from  entering the markets and playing into the hands of the  people.

       It is obvious that during the course of the hearing the scope  got enlarged and the Court has been addressed on very many  issues from very many angles.

       Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees life and personal  liberty to all persons.  It is well settled by repeated  pronouncements of this Court as also the High Courts that right to  life enshrined in Article 21 is not of mere survival or existence.  It  guarantees a right of persons to life with human dignity.  Therein  are included, all the aspects of life which go to make a person’s life  meaningful, complete and worth living.  The human life has its  charm and there is no reason why the life should not be enjoyed  along with all permissible pleasures.  Anyone who wishes to live in  peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a right to prevent the  noise as pollutant reaching him.  Noone can claim a right to create  noise even in his own premises which would travel beyond his  precincts and cause nuisance to neighbours or others.  Any noise  which has the effect of materially interfering with the ordinary  comforts of life judged by the standard of a reasonable man is  nuisance.  How and when a nuisance created by noise becomes  actionable has to be answered by reference to its degree and the  surrounding circumstances, the place and the time.  

       Those who make noise often take shelter behind Article  19(1)A pleading freedom of speech and right to expression.   Undoubtedly, the freedom of speech and right to expression are  fundamental rights but the rights are not absolute.  Nobody can  claim a fundamental right to create noise by amplifying the sound  of his speech with the help of loudspeakers.  While one has a right  to speech, others have a right to listen or decline to listen.  Nobody  can be compelled to listen and nobody can claim that he has a right  to make his voice trespass into the ears or mind of others.  Nobody  can indulge into aural aggression.  If anyone increases his volume

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 37  

of speech and that too with the assistance of artificial devices so as  to compulsorily expose unwilling persons to hear a noise raised to  unpleasant or obnoxious levels then the person speaking is violating  the right of others to a peaceful, comfortable and pollution-free life  guaranteed by Article 21.  Article 19(1)A cannot be pressed into  service for defeating the fundamental right guaranteed by Article  21.  We need not further dwell on this aspect.  Two decisions in this  regard delivered by High Courts have been brought to our notice  wherein the right to live in an atmosphere free from noise pollution  has been upheld as the one guaranteed by Article 21 of the  Constitution.  These decisions are Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan  Chand Aggarwal alias Bhagatji v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and  others, AIR (2001) Delhi 455 (D.B.) and P.A. Jacob v.  Superintendent of Police, Kottayam, AIR (1993) Kerala 1.  We  have carefully gone through the reasoning adopted in the two  decisions and the principle of law laid down therein, in particular,  the exposition of Article 21 of the Constitution.  We find ourselves  in entire agreement therewith.

       The present cases provide an opportunity for examining  several questions, such as what is noise?  What are its adverse  effects? Whether noise pollution runs in conflict with the  fundamental rights of the people? And what relief can be allowed by  way of directions issued in public interest?

I Noise \026 what it is?

       The word noise is derived from the Latin term "nausea". It  has been defined as "unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health  and communication dumped into the environment with regard to  the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears."  

       Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Sound which pleases the  listeners is music and that which causes pain and annoyance is  noise. At times, what is music for some can be noise for others .  

       Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)  Act, 1981, includes noise in the definition of ’air pollutant’.   

       Section 2(a) \026 "air pollutant" means any solid, liquid or  gaseous substance including noise present in the atmosphere in  such concentration as may be or tend to be injurious to human  beings or other living creatures or plants or property or  environment.  

       According to Encyclopaedia Britannica : "In acoustics noise is  defined as any undesired sound."  

       According to Chambers 20th Century Dictionary , noise  means\027  Sound especially of loud, harsh or confused kind;  a  sound of any kind;  an over loud or disturbing sound; frequent or  public talk.  

       In Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, the definition of noise  has undergone a change.  Noise pollution stands carved out as a  phrase separately from noise.  The two are defined as under :

"Noise \026 a sound; a harsh disagreeable sound, or such sound; a  din. pollution \026 an excessive or annoying degree of noise in a  particular area, e.g. from traffic or aeroplane engines."  

       "Pollution" is a noun derived from the verb "pollute". Section  2(c) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 defines  "environmental pollution" to mean the presence in the environment

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 37  

of any environmental pollutant. Section 2 (b) of the said Act defines  "environmental pollutant" to mean any solid, liquid or gaseous  substance present in such concentration as may be, or tends to be  injurious to environment.          Thus, the disturbance produced in our environment by the  undesirable sound of various kinds is called " noise pollution".

II Noise as nuisance and health hazard

       Noise is more than just a nuisance. It constitutes a real and  present danger to people’s health. Day and night, at home, at work,  and at play, noise can produce serious physical and psychological  stress. Noone is immune to this stress. Though we seem to adjust  to noise by ignoring it, the ear, in fact, never closes and the body  still responds-sometimes with extreme tension, as to a strange  sound in the night.

       Noise is a type of atmospheric pollution. It is a shadowy  public enemy whose growing menace has increased in the modern  age of industrialization and technological advancement. Although a  soft rhythmic sound in the form of music and dance stimulates  brain activities, removes boredom and fatigue, but its  excessiveness may prove detrimental to living things. Researches  have proved that a loud noise during peak marketing hours creates  tiredness, irritation and impairs brain activities so as to reduce  thinking and working abilities. Noise pollution was previously  confined to a few special areas like factory or mill, but today it  engulfs every nook and corner of the globe, reaching its peak in  urban areas. Industries, automobiles, rail engines, aeroplanes,  radios, loudspeakers, tape recorders, lottery ticket sellers, hawkers,  pop singers, etc., are the main ear contaminators of the city area  and its market place. The regular rattling of engines and  intermittent blowing of horns emanating from the caravan of  automobiles do not allow us to have any respite from irritant noise  even in suburban zones .      

       In the modern days noise has become one of the major  pollutants and it has serious effects on human health. Effects of  noise depend upon sound’s pitch, its frequency and time pattern  and length of exposure. Noise has both auditory and non-auditory  effects depending upon the intensity and the duration of the noise  level.  It affects sleep, hearing, communication, mental and  physical health. It may even lead to the madness of people.  

       However, noises, which are melodious, whether natural or  man-made, cannot always be considered as factors leading to  pollution.  

       Noise can disturb our work, rest, sleep, and communication.  It can damage our hearing and evoke other psychological, and  possibly pathological reactions. However, because of complexity,  variability and the interaction of noise with other environmental  factors, the adverse health effects of noise do not lend themselves  to a straightforward analysis .  

Hearing Loss

"Deafness, like poverty, stunts and deadens its victims."- says  Helen Keller. Hearing loss can be either temporary or permanent.  Noise-induced temporary threshold shift (NITTS) is a temporary  loss of hearing acuity experienced after a relatively short exposure  to excessive noise. Pre-exposure hearing is recovered fairly rapidly

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 37  

after cessation of the noise. Noise induced permanent threshold  shift (NIPTS) is an irreversible loss of hearing that is caused by  prolonged noise exposure. Both kinds of loss together with  presbyacusis, the permanent hearing impairment that is  attributable to the natural aging process, can be experienced  simultaneously .   

       NIPTS occurs typically at high frequencies, usually with a  maximum loss at around 4,000 Hz. It is now accepted that the risk  of hearing loss is negligible at noise exposure levels of less than 75  dB(A) Leq (8-hr). Based on national judgments concerning  acceptable risk, many countries have adopted industrial noise  exposure limits of 85 dB(A) +5 dB(A) in their regulations and  recommended practices .   [N.B.- Hz. is abbreviation of Hertz which  is the unit of frequency, equal to one cycle per second.  Hertz (Hz)  is the name, by international agreement, for the number of  repetitions of similar pressure variations per second of time; this  unit of frequency was previously called "cycles per second" (cps or  c/s)].   Interference with Communication          The interference of noise with speech communication is a  process in which one of two simultaneous sounds renders the other  inaudible. An important aspect of communication interference in  occupational situations is that the failure of workers to hear warning  signals or shouts may lead to injury. In offices, schools and homes,  speech interference is a major source of annoyance .  

Disturbance of sleep.  

       Noise intrusion can cause difficulty in falling asleep and can  awaken people who are asleep .  

Annoyance

       Noise annoyance may be defined as a feeling of displeasure  evoked by noise. The annoyance inducing capacity of a noise  depends upon many of its physical characteristics and variations of  these with time. However, annoyance reactions are sensitive to  many non-acoustic factors of a social, psychological, or economic  nature and there are considerable differences in individual reactions  to the same noise .

Effect on performance         Noise can change the state of alertness of an individual and  may increase or decrease efficiency. Performance of tasks involving  motor or monotonous activities is not always degraded by noise. At  the other extreme, mental activities involving vigilance, information  gathering and analytical processes appear to be particularly  sensitive to noise .  

Physiological Effects

       It has been determined that noise has an explicit effect on the  blood vessels, especially the smaller ones known as pre-capillaries.  Overall, noise makes these blood vessels narrower. Noise causes  the peripheral blood vessels in the toes, fingers, skin and abdominal  organs to constrict, thereby decreasing the amount of blood  normally supplied to these areas .  

       Possible clinical manifestations of stress concomitant with  noise are : (i) galvanic skin response, (ii) increased activity related

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 37  

to ulcer formation, (iii)changes in intestinal motility, (iv)changes in  skeletal muscle tension, (v) subjective response irritability  perception of loudness, (vi)increased sugar, cholesterol &  adrenaline, (vii)changes in heart rate, (viii)increased blood  pressure, (ix) increased adrenal hormones, (x)vasoconstriction. Not  only might there be harmful consequences to health during the  state of alertness, but research also suggests effects may occur  when the body is unaware or asleep.  (Source; NOISE EFFECTS  HANDBOOK, A Desk Reference to Health and Welfare Effects of  Noise By Office of the Scientific Assistant, Office of Noise  Abatement and Control, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  October 1979, Revised July 1981)

       The investigations have revealed that the blood vessels which  feed the brain, dilate in the presence of noise. This is the reason  why headaches result from listening to persistent high noise .   

       Field studies have also been conducted on various other  groups such as people living near airports, and school children  exposed to traffic noise,  showing that there may be some risk for  these people. In addition, laboratory studies on animals and  humans have demonstrated a relationship between noise and high  blood pressure. Other studies have shown that noise can induce  heart attacks .  

       Prolonged chronic noise can also produce stomach ulcers as it  may reduce the flow of gastric juice and change its acidity.  

With what other stress effects can noise be associated?   

       Stress can be manifested in any number of ways, including  headaches, irritability, insomnia, digestive disorders, and  psychological disorders. Workers who are exposed to excessive  noise frequently complain that noise just makes them tired.

       Quite a few field studies have been done on workers in  Europe, examining the relationship between noise and illness. In  these studies, noise has been related to the following:

General morbidity (illness);  Neuropsychological disturbances___  Headaches, Fatigue, Insomnia, Irritability, Neuroticism;  Cardiovascular system disturbances___ Hypertension, Hypotension,  cardiac disease; Digestive disorders___ Ulcers, Colitis; Endocrine and  biochemical disorders;

Noise and the unborn.  

       There is ample evidence that environment has a role in  shaping the physique, behavior and function of animals, including  men, from conception and not merely from birth. The fetus is  capable of perceiving sounds and responding to them by motor  activity and cardiac rate change .

Special Effects on unborn, children and human beings  generally

       The fetus is not fully protected from noise.  Noise may  threaten fetal development.  Noise has been linked to low birth  weights. Levels of noise which do not interfere with the perception  of speech by adults may interfere significantly with the perception  of speech by children as well as with the acquisition of speech,  language, and language-related skills.  Because they are just  learning, children have more difficulty in understanding language in  the presence of noise than adults do. Reading ability also may be  seriously impaired by noise.  Apart from children, the noise

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 37  

pollution causes several adverse effects on human beings generally.   Some of these are: (i) hearing loss, (ii) nonauditory physiological  response such as stress, arousal response, cardiovascular effects  etc.,(iii) communication interference, (iv) performance interference,  and (v) sleep disturbance and so on.  

III Sources of Noise Pollution.

       Noise pollution like other pollutants is also a by-product of  industrialization, urbanization and modern civilization.  

       Broadly speaking, the noise pollution has two sources, i.e.  industrial and non-industrial. The industrial source includes the  noise from various industries and big machines working at a very  high speed and high noise intensity. Non-industrial source of noise  includes the noise created by transport/vehicular traffic and the  neighbourhood noise generated by various noise pollution can also  be divided into the categories, namely, natural and manmade.   

       Most leading noise sources will fall into the following  categories: road traffic, aircraft, railroads, construction, industry,  noise in buildings, and consumer products.  

1.      Road traffic noise

       Noise from the motors and exhaust systems of large trucks  provides the major portion of highway noise impact, and provides a  potential noise hazard to the driver as well. In addition, noise from  the interaction of tyres with the roadway is generated by trucks,  buses, and private autos.

       In the city, the main sources of traffic noise are the motors  and exhaust systems of autos, smaller trucks, buses, and  motorcycles. This type of noise can be augmented by narrow  streets and tall buildings, which produce a "canyon" in which traffic  noise reverberates.

2.      Aircraft noise

       Nowadays, the problem of low-flying military aircraft has  added a new dimension to community annoyance, as the nation  seeks to improve its "nap-of-the-earth" warfare capabilities. In  addition, the issue of aircraft operations over national parks,  wilderness areas, and other areas previously unaffected by aircraft  noise has claimed national attention over recent years.  

3.      Noise from railroads

       The noise from locomotive engines, horns and whistles, and  switching and shunting operations in rail yards can impact  neighbouring communities and railroad workers. For example, rail  car retarders can produce a high-frequency, high-level screech that  can reach peak levels of 120 dB at a distance of 100 feet which  translates to levels as high as 138 or 140 dB at the railroad  worker’s ear.

4.      Construction noise

       The noise from construction of highways, city streets, and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 37  

buildings is a major contributor to the urban scene. Construction  noise sources include pneumatic hammers, air compressors,  bulldozers, loaders, dumptrucks (and their back-up signals), and  pavement breakers.  

5.      Noise in industry

       Although industrial noise is one of the less prevalent  community noise problems, neighbours of noisy manufacturing  plants can be disturbed by sources such as fans, motors, and  compressors mounted on the outside of buildings. Interior noise can  also be transmitted to the community through open windows and  doors, and even through building walls. These interior noise sources  have significant impacts on industrial workers, among whom noise- induced hearing loss is unfortunately common.

6.      Noise in buildings

       Apartment dwellers are often annoyed by noise in their  homes, especially when the building is not well designed and  constructed. In this case, internal building noise from plumbing,  boilers, generators, air conditioners, and fans, can be audible and  annoying. Improperly insulated walls and ceilings can reveal the  sound of amplified music, voices, footfalls, and noisy activities from  neighbouring units. External noise from emergency vehicles, traffic,  refuse collection, and other city noises can be a problem for urban  residents, especially when windows are open or insufficiently  glazed.  

7.      Noise from consumer products

       Certain household equipment, such as vacuum cleaners and  some kitchen appliances have been and continue to be  noisemakers, although their contribution to the daily noise dose is  usually not very large.  

IV Noise pollution in the special context of Fireworks.

       Fireworks are used all over the world to celebrate special  occasions. In India, fireworks are burst on festivals like Dussehra,  Diwali and on special occasions like social gatherings, marriages,  Independence day, Republic day, New year day, etc. In other  countries of the world, fireworks are generally burst either on the  New Year day or on the birthday of their respective countries.  However, bursting of firecrackers is a health hazard since it is  responsible for both air pollution and noise pollution .    

       The use of Fireworks has led to air pollution in the form of  noise and smoke. Their excessive use has started to be a public  hazard and violation of their fundamental rights as enshrined in the  Constitution of India.

       It has been held in the case of  "Om Birangana Religious  Society v. State, 100 CWN 617"  that the "Freedom of speech and  expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a)  of the Constitution of  India includes, by necessary implication, freedom not to listen   and/or to remain silent. A citizen has a right to leisure, right to  sleep, right not to hear and right to remain silent.  He also has the  right to read and speak with others". Because of the tremendous  sound and noise, the citizens cannot exercise all these fundamental  rights.  

       It has been seen that firecrackers noise is an impulsive noise

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 37  

and is hazardous. Bursting of a firecracker near the ear can lead  sometimes to non-recoverable hearing loss.  

       Diwali is the most important festival of India. The bursting of  firecrackers during this period is a wide spread practice. The  unpredictable, intermittent and impulsive noise produced by  bursting of crackers all around, turns the festival of lights into  cacophony of noise.  People are unable to even sleep due to this  excessive noise pollution. Several people are injured due to the  noise produced by firecrackers every year.  

       Firecrackers not only increase the ambient noise level but also  contribute significantly in increasing the air pollution by means of  toxic gases and particles due to their blast wave resulting from a  rapid release of energy.

       In order to assess the situation of noise pollution caused by  Firecrackers at the time of Diwali the Central Pollution Control  Board (CPCB) has been conducting ambient noise level monitoring  during Diwali festival regularly at various locations in Delhi since  1993, to find increased ambient noise level caused by intensive  burning of crackers. As in the past, the noise and air quality  monitoring have been carried out in the years 1999, 2000, 2001,  and 2002. The noise monitoring locations have been selected to  cover almost all areas of Delhi .

       An analysis of the reports prepared in the years 1999, 2000,  2001, and 2002 reveals that the ambient noise level on Diwali day  exceeded the limit at almost all the places during these years. The  noise level was higher during Diwali-2000 as compared to the  values recorded during Diwali festival in the years 1999, 2001, and  2002 .

       The percentage of violation in L.eq. noise level varied from 02  to 49%  in the year 2002, 12 to 55% in the year 2001, 11 to 58%  in the year 2000 and 22 to 47% in the year 1999 with respect to  the day time standards at all the areas . [N.B. \027 Equivalent  Continuous Sound Pressure Level, Leq is the level of that steady  sound which over the same interval of time, contains the same total  energy (or dose) as the fluctuating sound.  Equivalent continuous  sound level has gained widespread acceptance as a scale for the  measurement of long-term noise exposure.]

       The ambient noise level conducted during the years 1999 to  2002 on Diwali festival, exceeded the limit at all places in every  year and the percentage of violation varies from 2% to 58% .

       Thus, the study does reveal that the noise levels that have  been measured on all these occasions have been more than the  prescribed norms. This is a point of worry as it has been discussed  that noise pollution does tend to have adverse effects on a person.  Thus immediate steps in this direction need to be taken.  

       The problem of noise pollution due to firecrackers is not only  limited to India. Similar problems are being experienced in other  countries as well. In fact in United Kingdom, in Nottingham the "Be  Safe Not Sorry" campaign was launched after the post was  inundated with letters from readers to the newspaper saying they  were fed up with the noise, nuisance and the distress that fireworks  cause.  

V Methodology adopted in other countries for noise pollution  control.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 37  

                Different countries of the World have enacted different  legislations to control the noise pollution. For Example, in England  there is a Noise Abetment Act, 1960 Section 2 of this Act provides  that loudspeakers should not be operated between the hours of  9:00 in the evening and 8:00 in the following morning for any  purpose and at any other time for purpose of advertisement and  entertainment, trade or business. Control on Pollution Act of 1974,  contains provisions for controlling noise pollution and it provides  noise to be actionable must amount to nuisance in the ordinary  legal sense. Section 62 of the English Control of Pollution Act, 1974,  operates as perfect control for ’Street Noise’. This provision has  been defined as a highway and any other road, footway or square  or court which is for the time being open to public. In Japan there is  Anti Pollution Basic Law, which helps to control the pollution  including noise pollution.  

       A few of the notable legislations may be mentioned  illustratively.  

Noise Act 1996- U.K.  

       This Act makes provision about noise emitted from dwellings  at night; about the forfeiture and confiscation of equipment used to  make noise unlawfully; and for connected purposes. The kind of  complaint referred to is one made by any individual present in a  dwelling during night hours  that excessive noise is being emitted  from another dwelling. "Night hours" means the period beginning  with 11p.m. and ending with 7 a.m.  The Act provides for the  service of a notice on the offender by the prescribed officer if he  thinks that the noise being emitted is more than the permissible  limits.  

       In cases where the noise level does not come down in spite of  the notice being served, the officer can seize such equipments  which in his opinion are the source of such noise.  

Noise and Statutory Nuisance Act 1993  

       An Act to make provision for noise in a street to be a  statutory nuisance; to make provision with respect to the operation  of loudspeakers in a street; to make provision with respect to  audible intruder alarms; to make provision for expenses incurred by  local authorities in abating, or preventing the recurrence of, a  statutory nuisance to be a charge on the premises to which they  relate; and for connected purposes.

The US Noise Pollution and Abatement Act, 1970 is an  important legislation for regulating control and abatement of noise.  Under this Law the environment protection agency, acting through  the office of Noise Abatement and Control, holds public meetings in  selected cities to compile information on noise pollution.

The Public Health And Welfare:- Chapter 65- Noise  Control(US)

       The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United  States to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise  that jeopardizes their health or welfare. To that end, it is the  purpose of this chapter to establish a means for effective  coordination of Federal research and activities in noise control, to  authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 37  

products distributed in commerce, and to provide information to the  public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction  characteristics of such products.  

The Act further provides for \026

1. Identification of major noise sources 2. Noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce 3. Labeling 4. Quiet communities, research, and public information 5. Development of low-noise-emission products 6. Motor carrier noise emission standards

Noise Regulation Law-Japan.

       The purpose of this Law is to preserve living environment and  contribute to protection of the people’s health by regulating noise  generated by the operation of factories and other types of work  sites as well as construction work affecting a considerable area, and  by setting maximum permissible levels of motor vehicle noise.

       The prefectural governor shall designate concentrated  residential areas, school and hospital zones, and other such areas  in which it is deemed necessary to protect the living environment of  the residents from noise, as areas subject to the regulation of noise  produced by specified factories and specified construction work.

       The prefectural governor, while designating the areas  pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the preceding Article, shall establish  regulatory standards for specified hours and zones of said areas  within the scope of the standards set forth by the Director General  of the Environment Agency according to the necessary degree of  noise control in regard to specified factories for specified hours and  zones.

       Persons installing specific facilities are liable to report the  same to the prefectural governor within 30 days.  

       The governor has the powers to order change in the outlay of  the factory when they do not confer to the noise regulations.     

       Any party who plans to undertake construction projects which  involve specified construction work in designated areas, shall file a  report with the prefectural governor no later than seven (7) days  prior to the beginning of said construction.            The prefectural governor shall be responsible for the  monitoring of noise levels in designated areas.  

       For the regulation on noise caused by announcement through  the use of loudspeakers and noise emitted during the night time  operation of bars and restaurants, local government shall take  measures necessary to protect the living environment, including  restrictions on operating hours, in accordance with the local  physical and social conditions.  

       The regulations also prescribe the permissible noise levels for  the various areas, as well as the time periods between which noise- emitting machines can be used.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 37  

Law of the People’s Republic of China on Prevention and  Control of Pollution From Environmental Noise (adopted on October 29, 1996)

       This Law is enacted for the purpose of preventing and  controlling environmental noise pollution, protecting and improving  the living environment, ensuring human health and promoting  economic and social development.                   For purposes of this Law, "environmental noise" means the  sound that is emitted in the course of industrial production,  construction, transportation and social activities and that impairs  the living environment of the neighbourhood.

       The competent administrative department for environmental  protection under the State Council shall, in accordance with the  national standards for acoustic environmental quality and the  State’s economic and technological conditions, fix national limits for  environmental noise emission.

       Every project under construction, renovation or expansion  must conform to the regulations of the State governing  environmental protection.  

       The industrial noise emitted to the living environment of the  neighbourhood within an urban area shall be kept within the limits  set by the State on emission of environmental noise within the  boundary of an industrial enterprise.  

       The construction noise emitted to the living environment of  the neighbourhood within an urban area shall be kept within the  limits set by the State on the emission of environmental noise  within the boundary of a construction site.            It is forbidden to manufacture, sell or import automobiles that  emit noise beyond the limits set on noise level.  

       All units and individuals are forbidden to use high-pitch  loudspeakers in urban areas where noise-sensitive structures are  concentrated.                  Any unit or individual suffering from the hazards of  environmental noise pollution shall have the right to demand the  polluter to eliminate the hazards; if a loss has been caused, it shall  be compensated according to law.           "Noise emission" means emission of noise from the source to the  living environment of the neighbourhood.  "Noise-sensitive structures" mean structures that require a quiet  environment such as hospitals, schools, government offices,  research institutions and residential buildings.  

"Areas where noise-sensitive structures are concentrated" mean  such areas as medical treatment areas, cultural, education and  research districts and areas where government offices or residential  buildings constitute the main buildings.  

"At night" means the period from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.  

Australia

       In New South Wales (NSW) no single government authority  has the responsibility or capacity to be able to minimise all forms of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 37  

noise pollution. The State is excluded from control of noise in a  number of areas by commonwealth legislation. These include  aircraft noise, where noise limits could affect trade, and the setting  standards for noise emissions from new vehicles. In areas where  the State does have powers to control noise the Environment  Protection Authority (EPA) has an overall responsibility for  environmental noise (as distinct from occupational noise), under  the Noise Control Act 1975. The Act deals with the prevention,  minimisation and abatement of noise and vibration and empowers  the EPA, the Waterways Authority, local government and the police  for these purposes.

       The EPA controls noise from scheduled premises those  required by the Noise Control Act to have a licence and noise  associated with rail traffic and the construction or upgrading of  freeways and toll roads. The Police and local council are generally  responsible for neighbourhood noise issues and have authority to  issue noise abatement directions to control noise from premises and  for noise from burglar alarms. Local council have an essential role  in minimising the effects of excessive noise, particularly in their  local residential areas, from smaller factories, non-scheduled  premises and public places. The Waterways Authority has specific  responsibilities in relation to noise from vessels in navigable waters.  

       Under the provisions of the Noise Control Act 1975 in NSW  the railway system is classified as scheduled premises and as such  the EPA has a regulatory role, and seeks to achieve noise targets  for rail operations throughout the State to minimise the impact on  local residents.  

       The EPA issues licences for the management of scheduled  premises. When issuing a licence the EPA sets initial noise limits  that are achievable with the operation of plant and equipment  currently installed, operated and maintained effectively. To achieve  further improvements in noise exposure to residents, negotiations  with the licensed premises are carried out and can be incorporated  in the licence as Pollution Reduction Programs (PRPs). The EPA is  currently working with industry to reduce noise levels from major  sources.

       The Noise Control (Miscellaneous Articles) Regulation 1995  was introduced to cover community noise issues not covered by  previous legislation. It includes limitations on burglar alarms for  both residential and commercial premises. Changes have been  made to the night-time control of common domestic noise sources  such as power tools, air conditioners, amplified music and lawn  mowers. Under the new regulation only one warning to the offender  is required and the warning is valid for 28 days. If an offence is  committed within this period a fine can be issued without further  warnings. The previous regulation warning was only active for 12  hours which meant it was not very effective with repetitious  offences typical in suburban areas.  

       The Noise Control (Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle  Accessories) Regulation 1995 controls the noise of individual motor  vehicles. It includes a provision to control noise from a range of  accessories including horns, alarms, refrigeration units and sound  systems. It also places responsibility to ensure compliance of  repairs/modifications of vehicles on the vehicle repairers.  

       In addition to the measures introduced to reduce the source  and transmission of noise, measures can be undertaken to noise  proof buildings thereby reducing the occupant exposure to noise.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 37  

Montgomery County Noise Control Ordinance

       The Montgomery County Noise Control Ordinance allows for  normal activities during regular hours; however, it does attempt to  eliminate interference from noise when most of us want to rest and  relax. It also seeks to control disturbing and unhealthy levels of  noise in general. Key provisions of the Noise Control Ordinance:  (i)   Provide day/night sound level limits.  (ii)  Establish "quiet hours."  (iii) Define sounds that constitute noise disturbances. (iv) Establish a "nuisance provision" that prohibits certain noises at  any time.          A noise disturbance, as defined by the ordinance, is any  sound that is unpleasant, annoying, or loud; abnormal for the time  or location; and prejudicial to health, comfort, property, or the  conduct of business. Under the ordinance, it is unlawful to create a  noise disturbance anywhere during "quiet hours," including multi- family buildings and townhouses. The "nuisance provision" prohibits  some noise disturbances anywhere at any time.

       The Montgomery County Noise Control Ordinance promotes  peace and quiet for everyone by covering a wide variety of  residential and business situations. The Ordinance does not cover  noise from aircraft and railroads or motor vehicles on public  roadways, as Federal and State governments supersede local  regulation. Also exempt are emergency operations by public  utilities.

       Among other provisions, the Montgomery County Noise  Control Ordinance makes it illegal to:  (i)     Operate, or allow to be operated, a radio, television, or other  electronic sound-producing device on public or private property if  the sound exceeds 55 decibels at the receiving property line.  (ii)    Create a noise disturbance during "quiet hours" in a  residential zone or multi-family structure.  (iii)   Operate any equipment that exceeds the receiving property  line sound level limits.  (iv)    Allow an animal or fowl to create a noise disturbance at any  time.  (vi)     Load or unload material during "quiet hours."  (vi)    Create a noise disturbance across property lines during "quiet  hours" by operating power equipment mounted on a motor vehicle;  for example, refrigerated trucks or commercial vacuum cleaners.  (vii)   Permit construction noise to exceed 75 decibels, with  allowances for higher decibel levels under an approved "Noise  Suppression Plan."  VI Statutory Laws in India

       Not that the Legislature and the Executive in India are  completely unmindful of the menace of noise pollution.  Laws have  been enacted and the Rules have been framed by the Executive for  carrying on the purposes of the legislation. The real issue is with  the implementation of the laws.  What is needed is the will to  implement the laws.  It would be useful to have a brief resume of   some of the laws which are already available on the Statute Book.  Treatment of the problem of noise pollution can be dealt under the  Law of Crimes and Civil Law. Civil law can be divided under two  heads (i) The Law of Torts (ii) The General Civil Law. The cases  regarding noise have not come before the law courts in large  quantity. The reason behind this is that many people in India did  not consider noise as a sort of pollution and they are not very much  conscious about the evil consequences of noise pollution. The level  of noise pollution is relative and depends upon a person and a  particular place. The law will not take care of a super sensitive

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 37  

person but the standard is of an average and rational human being  in the society.  

The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000

       In order to curb the growing problem of noise pollution, the  Government of India has enacted the Noise Pollution(Regulation  and Control) Rules, 2000. Prior to the enactment of these rules  noise pollution was not being dealt specifically by a particular Act.  

"Whereas the increasing ambient noise levels in public places  from various sources, inter-alia, industrial activity,  construction activity, generator sets, loudspeakers, public  address systems, music systems, vehicular horns and other  mechanical devices, have deleterious effects on human health  and the psychological well being of the people; it is  considered necessary to regulate and control noise producing  and generating sources with the objective of maintaining the  ambient air quality standard in respect of noise;"      

       The main  provisions of the noise rules are as under:

1.      The State Government may categorize the areas into  industrial, commercial, residential or silence areas/zones for the  purpose of implementation of noise standards for different areas.

2.      The ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for  different areas/zones has been specified for in the Schedule  annexed to the Rules.

3.      The State Government shall take measures for abatement of  noise including noise emanating from vehicular movements and  ensure that the existing noise levels do not exceed the ambient air  quality standards specified under these rules.   4.      An area comprising not less than 100 meters around  hospitals, educational institutions and courts may be declared as  silence area/zone for the purpose of these rules.  

5.      A loudspeaker or a public address system shall not be used  except after obtaining written permission from the authority and  the same shall not be used at night i.e. between 10.00p.m. and  6.00 a.m.

6.      A person found violating the provisions as to the maximum  noise permissible in any particular area shall be liable to be  punished for it as per the provisions of these rules and any other  law in force.  

Indian Penal Code

       Noise  pollution can be dealt under Sections 268, 290 and 291  of the Indian Penal Code, as a public nuisance. Under Section 268  of this Code, it is mentioned that ’A person is guilty of a public  nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which  causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or  the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity,  or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or  annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public  right.   

       A common nuisance is not excused on the ground  that it  causes some convenience or advantage.’

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 37  

       Sections 290 and 291 of the Indian Penal Code deal with the  punishment for public nuisance.  

Criminal Procedure Code

       Under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  the magistrate has the power to make conditional order requiring  the person causing nuisance to remove such nuisance.  

The Factories Act, 1948.  

       The Factories Act does not contain any specific provision for  noise control. However, under  the Third Schedule Sections 89 and  90 of the Act, ’noise  induced hearing loss’, is mentioned as a  notifiable disease. Under section 89 of the Act, any medical  practitioner who detects any notifiable disease, including noise- induced hearing loss, in a worker, has to report the case to the  Chief Inspector of Factories, along with all other relevant  information. Failure to do so is a  punishable offence.  

       Similarly, under the Model Rules, limits for noise exposure for  work zone area has been prescribed.  

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and Rules framed thereunder

       Rules 119 and 120 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989,  deal with reduction of noise.  

Rule 119. Horns

(1)     On and after expiry of one year from the date of  commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment)  Rules, 1999, every motor vehicle including construction  equipment vehicle and agricultural tractor manufactured shall  be fitted with an electric horn or other devices conforming to  the requirements of IS: 1884?1992, specified by the Bureau  of Indian Standards for use by the driver of the vehicle and  capable of giving audible and sufficient warning of the  approach or position of the vehicle: Provided that on and from 1st January, 2003, the horn  installation shall be as per AIS-014 specifications, as may be  amended from time to time, till such time as corresponding  Bureau of Indian Standards specifications are notified. (2)     No motor vehicle shall be fitted with any multi-toned  horn giving a succession of different notes or with any other  sound-producing device giving an unduly harsh, shrill, loud or  alarming noise.    

Rule 120. Silencers (1)     Every motor vehicle including agricultural tractor shall be  fitted with a device (hereinafter referred to as a silencer)  which by means of an expansion chamber or otherwise  reduces as far as practicable, the noise that would otherwise  be made by the escape of exhaust gages from the engine.  

(2)     Noise standards? Every motor vehicle shall be constructed   and maintained so as to conform to noise standards specified  in Part E of the Schedule VI to the Environment (Protection)  Rules, 1986, when tested as per IS: 3028-1998, as amended  from time to time.

Law of Torts   

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 37  

        Quietness and freedom from noise are indispensable to the  full and free enjoyment of a dwelling-house.  No proprietor has an  absolute right to create noises upon his own land, because any right  which the law gives is qualified by the condition that it must not be  exercised to the nuisance of his neighbours or of the public. Noise  will create an actionable nuisance only if it materially interferes with  the ordinary comfort of life, judged by ordinary, plain and simple  notions, and having regard to the locality; the question being one of  degree in each case.  

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981         Noise was included in the definition of air pollutant in Air  (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act in 1987. Thus, the  provisions of the Air Act, became applicable in respect of noise  pollution, also.     

The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.          Although there is no specific provision to deal with noise  pollution, the Act confers powers on Government of India to take  measures to deal with various types of pollution including noise  pollution.      

Fireworks

       The Explosives Act, 1884 regulates manufacture, possession,  use, sale, transport, import & export of explosives.  Firecrackers are  governed by this Statute. Rule 87 of the Explosives Rule, 1983  prohibits manufacture of any explosive at any place, except in  factory or premises licensed under the Rules.  

       In India there is no separate Act that regulates the  manufacture,  possession, use, sale, manufacture and transactions  in firecrackers. All this is regulated by The Explosives Act, 1884.  The Noise that is produced by these fireworks is regulated by the  Environmental Protection Act, 1986 and The Noise Pollution  (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.   

VII JUDICIAL OPINION IN INDIA

       In Kirori Mal Bishambar Dayal v. The State AIR 1958  Punjab 11, accused/petitioner was convicted and sentenced under  Section 290 of Indian Penal Code 1860 and was fined Rs. 50 for  causing noise and emitting smoke and vibrations by operating of  heavy machinery in the residential area. The orders of the trial  court was upheld by the District Magistrate in appeal. The High  Court of Punjab & Haryana also upheld the decision of the courts  below and dismissed the revision petition. In the case of Bhuban  Ram & Ors. v. Bibhuti Bhushan Biswas AIR 1919 Calcutta 539,  it was held that working of a paddy husking machine at night  causes nuisance by noise and the occupier was held liable to be  punished under Section 290 IPC. In  Ivour Heyden v. State of  Andhra Pradesh 1984 Cri LJ (NOC) 16, the High Court of Andhra  Pradesh excused the act of playing radio loudly on the ground that  it was a trivial act. Careful reading of Section 95 of IPC shows that  only that harm is excused which is not expected to be complained  by the person of ordinary temper and sense.   

       In Rabin Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal AIR 1985  Cal. 222 the use of air horns was prohibited by the court to prevent  noise pollution. The Court observed: "\005it is found that the atmosphere and the environment

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 37  

is very much polluted from indiscriminating noise  emitted from different quarters and on research it was  found that persons who are staying near the Airport,  are becoming victim of various ailments. Such persons  even become victim of mental disease. On such  research it was also found that workers in various  factories even become deaf and hard of hearing. It was  further found on such research that as a result of this  excessive noise pollution, people suffer from loss of  appetite, depression, mental restlessness and insomnia.  People also suffer from complain of excessive blood  pressure and heart trouble. It is not necessary to go  into the question about direct effect of such noise  pollution because of indiscriminate and illegal use of  such electric and air horn as it is an admitted position  that the same is injurious to health and amongst  different causes of environmental pollution, sound  pollution is one which is of grave concern."    

                 In the case of People United for better Living in Calcutta  v. State of West Bengal (AIR 1993 Cal. 215) the Calcutta High  Court observed: "In a developing country there shall have to be  developments, but that development shall have to be in  closest possible harmony with the environment, as  otherwise there would be development but no  environment, which would result in total devastation,  though, however, may not be felt in present but at  some future point of time, but then it would be too late  in the day, however, to control and improve the  environment. In fact, there should be a proper balance  between the protection of environment and the  development process. The society shall have to prosper,  but not at the cost of the environment and in similar  vein, the environment shall have to be protected but  not at the cost of the development of the society and as  such a balance has to be found out and administrative  actions ought to proceed accordingly."  

In Burrabazar Fireworks Dealers Association v.  Commissioner of police, Calcutta, AIR 1998 Cal. 121 it has been  held   "Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India does not  guarantee the fundamental right to carry on trade or  business which creates pollution or which takes away  that communities safety, health and peace. \005A citizen  or people cannot be made a captive listener to hear the  tremendous sounds caused by bursting out from a noisy  fireworks. It may give pleasure to one or two persons  who burst it but others have to be a captive listener  whose fundamental rights guaranteed under Article  19(10(a) and other provisions of the Constitution are  taken away, suspended and made meaningless. \005Under  Art. 19(1)(a), read withy Art. 21 of the constitution of  India, the citizens have a right of decent environment  and they have a right to live peacefully, right to sleep at  night and to have a right to leisure which are all  necessary under Art. 21 of the Constitution."(Headnote)  

In Appa Rao, M.S. v. Govt. of T.N. , (1995) 1 LW 319  (Mad), the Madras High Court taking a note of the serious health  hazard and disturbance to public order and tranquility caused by  the uncontrolled noise pollution prevailing in the State, issued a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 37  

writ of mandamus for directing State Government to impose strict  conditions for issue of license for the use of amplifiers and  loudspeakers and for directing Director-General, Police (Law and  Order) to impose total ban on use of horn type loudspeakers and  amplifiers and air horns of automobiles.   

       In P.A. Jacob v. the Superintendent of Police, AIR (1993)  Kerala 1, it was said \027 "The right to speech implies, the right to  silence.  It implies freedom, not to listen, and not to be forced to  listen.  The right comprehends freedom to be free from what one  desires to be free from.  Free speech is not to be treated as a  promise to everyone with opinions and beliefs, to gather at any  place and at any time and express their views in any manner.  The  right is subordinate to peace and order.  A person can decline to  read a publication, or switch off a radio or a television set.  But, he  cannot prevent the sound from a loudspeaker reaching him.  He  could be forced to hear what, he wishes not, to hear.  That will be  an invasion of his right to be let alone, to hear what he wants to  hear, or not to hear, what he does not wish to hear.  One may put  his mind or hearing to his own uses, but not that of another.   Noone has a right to trespass on the mind or ear of another and  commit auricular or visual aggression.  A loudspeaker is mechanical  device, and it has no mind or thought process in it.  Recognition of  the right of speech or expression is recognition accorded to a  human faculty.   A right belongs to human personality, and not to a  mechanical device.  One may put his faculties to reasonable uses.   But, he cannot put his machines to any use he likes.  He cannot use  his machines to injure others.  Intervention with a machine, is not  intervention with, or invasion of a human faculty or right.  No  mechanical device can be upgraded to a human faculty.  A  computer or a robot cannot be conceded the right under Art. 19  (though they may be useful to man to express his faculties).  No  more, a loudspeaker.  The use of a loudspeaker may be incidental  to the exercise of the right.  But, its use is not a matter of right, or  part of the right".

       In  Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan Chand Aggarwal alias  Bhagatji v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others,  AIR (2001) Delhi  455, it was said that "Pollution being wrongful contamination of the  environment which causes material injury to the right of an  individual, noise can well be regarded as a pollutant because it  contaminates environment, causes nuisance and affects the health  of a person and would therefore, offend Art. 21, if it exceeds a  reasonable limit."    

       The Supreme Court in Church of God (Full Gospel) in  India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Assn., (2000) 7 SCC  282 held that the Court may issue directions in respect of  controlling noise pollution even if such noise was a direct result of  and was connected with religious activities.   It was further held:-

       "Undisputedly, no religion prescribes that prayers  should be performed by disturbing the peace of others  nor does it preach that they should be through voice  amplifiers or beating of drums. In our view, in a  civilized society in the name of religion, activities which  disturb old or infirm persons, students or children  having their sleep in the early hours or during daytime  or other persons carrying on other activities cannot be  permitted. It should not be forgotten that young babies  in the neighbourhood are also entitled to enjoy their  natural right of sleeping in a peaceful atmosphere. A  student preparing for his examination is entitled to  concentrate on his studies without their being any

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 37  

unnecessary disturbance by the neighbours. Similarly,  the old and the infirm are entitled to enjoy reasonable  quietness during their leisure hours without there being  any nuisance of noise pollution. Aged, sick, people  afflicted with psychic disturbances as well as children up  to 6 years of age are considered to be very sensible (sic  sensitive) to noise. Their rights are also required to be  honoured.

       "Under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,  rules for noise-pollution level are framed which  prescribe permissible limits of noise in residential,  commercial, industrial areas or silence zone. The  question is \027 whether the appellant can be permitted to  violate the said provisions and add to the noise  pollution. In our view, to claim such a right itself would  be unjustifiable. In these days, the problem of noise  pollution has become more serious with the increasing  trend towards industrialisation, urbanization and  modernisation and is having many evil effects including  danger to health. It may cause interruption of sleep,  affect communication, loss of efficiency, hearing loss or  deafness, high blood pressure, depression, irritability,  fatigue, gastrointestinal problems, allergy, distraction,  mental stress and annoyance etc. This also affects  animals alike. The extent of damage depends upon the  duration and the intensity of noise. Sometimes it leads  to serious law and order problem. Further, in an  organized society, rights are related with duties towards  others including neighbours\005\005...

\005\005..because of urbanization or industrialization the  noise pollution may in some area of a city/town might  be exceeding permissible limits prescribed under the  Rules, but that would not be a ground for permitting  others to increase the same by beating of drums or by  use of voice amplifiers, loudspeakers or by such other  musical instruments and, therefore, rules prescribing  reasonable restrictions including the Rules for the use of  loudspeakers and voice amplifiers framed under the  Madras Town Nuisances Act, 1889 and also the Noise  Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 are  required to be enforced."

       In Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India (AIR 1990 SC 1480)  the Supreme  Court reiterated the need to create separate tribunals  and asserted the need to appoint a body of experts to advice the  Government on environmental issues.

       In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2004) 1 SCC 571 this  Court has emphasized the need for creating environmental  awareness amongst students through education.

        We have referred to a few, not all available judgments.   Suffice it to observe that Indian Judicial opinion has been uniform in  recognizing right to live in freedom from noise pollution as a  fundamental right protected by Article 21 of the Constitution and  noise pollution beyond permissible limits as an in-road on that  right.   We agree with and record our approval of the view taken  and the opinion expressed by the several High Courts in the  decisions referred to hereinabove.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 37  

VIII Interim orders

       During the course of the hearing of this case the Court had  passed several interim orders keeping in mind the importance of  the issue.  

       The interim order dated 27/09/2001 deserves to be  mentioned in particular, which directed as under:

"(1) The Union Government, the Union  Territories as well as all the State  Governments shall take steps to strictly comply  with Notification No. G.S.R. 682(E) dated  October 05, 1999 whereby the Environment  (Protection) Rules, 1986 framed under the  Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 were  amended. They shall in particular comply with  amended Rule 89 of the said Rules, which  reads as follows:  

"89. Noise standards for fire- crackers

A.(i) The manufacture, sale or use of  firecrackers generating noise level  exceeding 125 dB(AI) or 145 dB( C)pk at  4 meters distance from the point of  bursting shall be prohibited.  

(ii) For individual fire-cracker constituting  the series (joined fire-crackers), the  above mentioned limit be reduced by 5  log 10(N) dB, where N = number of  crackers joined together."  

(2) The use of fireworks or fire-crackers  shall not be permitted except between  6.00 a.m. and 10.00p.m. No firework or  firecracker shall be allowed between  10.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m.

(3) Firecrackers shall not be used at any  time in silence zones, as defined in S.O.  1046(E) issued on 22.11.2000 by the  Ministry of Environment and Forests. In  the said Notification Silence Zone has  been defined as: " Silence Zone is an area comprising not  less than 100 meters around hospitals,  educational institutions, courts, religious  places or any other area which is  declared as such by the competent  authority."  

(4) The State Education Resource  Centers in all the States and the Union   Territories as well as the  management/principals of schools in all  the States and Union Territories shall  take appropriate steps to educate  students about the ill effects of air and  noise pollution and appraise them of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 23 of 37  

directions (1) to (3) above."

These interim directions were also directed to be given wide  publicity both by electronic and print media. It was said that  Doordarshan and other television channels shall give publicity to  these directions, at least once every day during prime time, during  the fortnight before Dussehra and Diwali. The Ministry of  Information and Broadcasting was asked to  bring these directions  to the notice of the general public through appropriate  advertisements, issued in the newspapers. The All India Radio was  asked to broadcast these directions on prime time on FM and other  frequencies for information of the general public.

       Due to the imposition of the restrictions on the bursting of  firecrackers, several Interim Applications came to be  filed before  the Court. The Court vide its interim order dated 10.9.2003 stated:-

"Through the I.A.s filed in this Court the following two  suggestions deserve notice.            Firstly, it is submitted that certain local festivals and  celebrations are accompanied customarily by bursting of  firecrackers which is at times at such hours as is not  permissible under the order of this Court dated  27.9.2001. Secondly, it is pointed out that the industry  of fireworks may face serious difficulty, even partial  closure, on account of the directions made by this  Court.  

We have grave doubts if the abovesaid considerations  can come in the way of the enforcement of fundamental  rights guaranteed by the Constitution for the citizens  and people of India to live in peace and comfort, in an  atmosphere free from pollution of any kind, such as one  caused by noise and foul/poisonous gases. However  still, without expressing any final opinion on the pleas  advanced, we allow the parties adversely affected the  liberty to make representation to their respective State  Governments and the State Governments may, in their  turn, if satisfied of the genuineness of the  representation made, invite the attention of the Govt. of  India, to the suggestions made."       

       We are happy to note that the initial reluctance to abide by  the interim directions made by this Court as displayed by the  subsequent interlocutory applications soon gave way to compliance.   By and large the interim directions made by the Court were  observed in compliance.  Police and civil administration remained  alert during Diwali Festival to see that the directions made by the  Court were complied with.  Resident Welfare Associations and  school children gave a very encourageous response who voluntarily  desisted from bursting firecrackers in prohibited hours of night and  also bursting such firecrackers as produce high level noise.    

IX

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 24 of 37  

Difficulty in implementation of noise pollution control  methodology in India.

       India has passed through the stage of being characterised as  a developing country and is ready to enter and stand in the line of  developed countries.  Yet, the issue of noise pollution in India has  not been taken so far with that seriousness as it ought to have  been.  Firstly, as we have stated earlier, there is a lack of will on  the part of the Executive to implement the laws.  This has  contributed to lack of infrastructure essential for attaining the  enforcement of laws.  Secondly, there is lack of requisite awareness  on the part of the citizens.  The deleterious effects of noise pollution  are not well known to the people and are not immediately  perceptible.  People generally accept noise pollution as a part of life,  a necessary consequence of progress and prosperity.

       The problems that are being faced in controlling noise  pollution are:- 1.      The Statutes and the Rules framed thereunder are not  comprehensive enough so as to deal with all the problems  and issues related to noise pollution.  This impression of ours  stands reaffirmed on a comparative reading of legislation in  India with these in other countries of the world to which we  have referred to briefly earlier in this judgment.

2.      The authorities responsible for implementing the laws  are not yet fully identified. Those which have been  designated, do not seem to be specialised in the task of  regulating noise pollution.  There is dearth of necessary  personnel technically qualified to act effectively.  What is  needed is a combination of technically qualified and  administratively competent personnel with the requisite  desire and dedication for implementation of the laws.

      3.      There is lack of proper gadgets and equipments and  other infrastructure such as labs for measuring the noise  levels. Due to the shortage of the instruments needed for the  purpose of measuring sound, the policemen who are on the  job usually end up measuring sound with their ears itself and  not with the use of technical instruments.  

X  Firecrackers.

       In the context of firecrackers in particular, several questions  do arise for which answers shall have to be found. What should be  the maximum permissible sound level for firecrackers? What should  be the method of checking whether a particular firecracker shall  emit sound which shall be within permissible limits? Which authority  shall be conferred with the responsibility for ensuring the effective  implementation of these noise levels? What should be the time limit  during which the bursting of firecrackers should be allowed? Should  there be any relaxation in the hours fixed for bursting firecrackers  during festival? Should the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986,  be amended in such a way that the firecrackers manufactured for  export in other countries are exempted from the Indian noise  standards?

What is the Maximum sound level that should be permissible  for firecrackers?      

       At present the maximum permissible sound level for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 25 of 37  

firecrackers as per the noise standard is provided by Item 89, Sch.  I, Table 1.5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986:  "89. Noise Standard for Fire- crackers

A.      (i) The manufacture, sale or use of fire- crackers generating noise level  exceeding 125 dB(AI) or 145dB(C)pk at  4 meters distance from the point of  bursting shall be prohibited.   

       (ii) For individual firecrackers  constituting the series (joined fire- crackers), the above mentioned limit be  reduced by 5 log 10 (N)dB, where N=  Number of crackers joined together."

The learned animus curiae had on 17th September 2001, filed  certain suggestions for issuance of directions for consideration of  the Court. In it he had suggested that the maximum noise level of  firecrackers could be fixed at 65 dB(A).                   It is submitted that the limit of emission of noise prescribed in  the Rules is too liberal and errs on higher side. It is suggested that  the manufacture of Firecrackers or those dealing with them should  ensure that only such crackers are produced and marketed which  do not emit noise of more than 65 dB(A).  

       The Government of India had not accepted the above  suggestion of the learned Amicus. The government replied to it in  the following words.  

       "Sound level of 65 dB(A) for firecrackers  is too low a level to be prescribed. The noise  levels prescribed in GSR 682 (E) dated 5TH  October, 1999, have been evolved by a  technical committee and need to be complied  with."

       The Fire workers industry also submitted an application to the  Union Minister of Environment and Forest at a meeting convened in  New Delhi on 15/04/2004, pleading justification for the increase  proposed in the prescribed firecrackers noise standards from 125  dB(AI) to 135 db(AI) and from 145 dB(c)p k to 155(C)pk.  

       In an Article on Firecracker Noise, a Hazard- A review of its  Standards, by, Dr. S.P. Singhal, published in MAPAN- Journal of  Metrology Society of India, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002; pp. 101-117, Dr.  Singhal has stated:

       "UK and many other European Economic  Commission (EEC) countries have adopted an exposure  limit of 140dB(lin) peak sound pressure level for  impulsive or cracker noise for a maximum exposure of  100 impulses per day.  

       European Standardization Committee CEN/TC/212  WG3 is also working to set-up standards on fireworks.  Some of the countries have desired the limit to be set  at 112dB(AI) and, several others have wanted it to be  set at125dB(AI) or even at 126-127 dB(AI) at the  testing distance, with the peak sound pressure level to  be 20dB higher than these limits. It has fixed a noise  level of 120dB(AI) measured at the testing distance on

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 26 of 37  

an ad hoc basis for category 2 fireworks.

       Canada has adopted the damage risk criterion of  140dBA peak sound pressure level at a distance of 5m  from the point of explosion of the cracker. It is  applicable in all categories of fireworks unless otherwise  specified."  

Keeping all these submissions in mind it does seem that the present  noise standards as prescribed in India by the Government of India,  are correct and do not need to be altered at the moment. However,  if the Government is of the opinion that this sound level needs to be  increased or reduced at a later date it is free to do so.     

Should a firecracker be tested on the basis of sound level or  on the basis of chemical compositions so as to check, does  the firecracker correspond with the prescribed rules?

For an effective implementation of noise pollution prevention  programme, it is essential that such a method be devised whose  enforcement shall not be problematic. A rule should be so designed,  that it is possible for all concerned to be able to implement it, and  thus it is not violated by anyone due to some kind of supervening  impossibility. Almost all the parties concerned have expressed a  discontent about the present system of enforcement of noise level  pertaining to firecrackers. Lack of infrastructure on account of noise  measuring devices, high cost of such devices, low noise levels  prescribed, expensive rates for getting samples tested, long time  taken by the testing laboratories are a few of the difficulties that  have been cited in the enforcement of the noise standards.           The Department of Explosives has filed two affidavits before  the Court, the first on 1.4.2003 and the second on 16.2.2004,  besides a joint affidavit which was filed by the Ministry of  Environment and Forest on behalf of the Union of India on  29.8.2003.           In the aforesaid Affidavits, the stand taken by  the  Department of Explosives  before the Court is: (i)     that "the firecrackers noise standard prescribed under the  Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 requires costly instruments,  wide infrastructure and special expertise in the fields of acoustic  science." (para-8 of Affidavit dated 1.4.2003)

(ii)    that "the Department is not prepared in terms of manpower  equipments and infrastructure for implementation of the standard  which is based on measurement of noise level" (para-9 of Affidavit  dated 1.4.2003)

(iii)   that "the Department of Explosives is of the opinion that the  noise level of firecrackers can be efficiently controlled by specifying  the size, shape, composition and quantity of chemicals in the  fireworks, which are the prime factors that determine the noise  level which entails a lot of R & D work. The maximum permissible  size of firecrackers and the maximum possible weight of the  chemicals for each variety would be mentioned in the list of  authorized explosives appended to the Explosives Rules consequent  upon amendment of the Explosives Rules."(para-15 of Affidavit  dated 1.4.2003.)

(iv)    that "the department is already publishing one authorized List  of Explosives, which is updated periodically as and when new items  of explosives are approved by the Department. The specification for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 27 of 37  

the approved varieties are prescribed in the said Authorised List, in  terms of permissible size, permissible composition of chemicals,  mass of charge and other such physical and chemical properties.  The items which are not listed in the authorized list cannot be  manufactured, stored, transported or sold as per various provisions  of the Explosives Rules. Anybody proposing to manufacture a new  variety of fireworks shall apply to the Chief Controller of Explosives,  Nagpur along with detailed drawings, samples and prescribed fee  for testing and approval. Noise regulations for firecrackers can be  implemented effectively through the Authorised List in four phases:  

(i)     The permissible sound level of 125 dB(AI) notified  under the Rules is taken as the guideline for purpose of  implementation by the Department of Explosives.  

(ii)    To achieve this, the Department can experiment with  various sizes, chemicals and compositions in order to  devise the optimal set of factors for each variety, to  result in the desired noise level.  

(iii)   This set of factors or parameters for each variety of  firecrackers will then be notified under the Authorized  List of Explosives under the Explosives Rules, 1983.  

(iv)    Any violation from the authorized List exceeding the  permitted size, permitted chemical content and  chemical composition will attract legal action."( para-16  of affidavit dated 1.4.2003).

       In the Affidavit filed on 16.2.2004, the Chief Controller of  Explosives stated:- (1)     That since the role of the Department of Explosives is  mainly administration and enforcement of the  Explosives Rules 1983 and the status of the Department  is statutory in nature hence the Department of  Explosives had already taken up the matter and advised  the fireworks manufacturers of developing and  producing environment friendly fireworks besides  advocating to promote, sale and use of only  fireworks/crackers meeting the noise standards  prescribed under Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986  and amendments thereof.

(2)     That it is impractical for Government of India to fix  norms regarding chemical composition and the size of  the firecrackers. It is the duty and responsibility of the  manufacturer to control size and composition of  firecrackers to comply with the noise limits prescribed  under the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986.

(3)     That it is impractical owing to the shortage of   infrastructure available with the Department of  Explosives. The licensing for the manufacture of  firecrackers shall be as per the Explosives Act, 1884.  The Power of the District Magistrate for issuing licenses  is to be retained as per the Rules.  

(4)     That the matter is now open and the manufacturers are  at liberty to manufacture, develop, promote and sell  only those fireworks, which comply with the noise limits  prescribed under the Environment (Protection) Rules  1986 and Explosive Rules, 1983.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 28 of 37  

(5)     That the Department of Explosives had already made  mandatory for the manufacturers of fireworks to  mention the noise levels in decibel units on firecrackers.  The manufacturers are also required to declare on the  packing of the boxes that the noise levels conform to  the standards prescribed under the Environment  (Protection) Rules, 1986.  The Department had already  included the prescribed noise limits for firecrackers as  additional conditions of licenses issued under the  Explosives Rules 1983.  The authorities empowered to  enforce the Explosives Rules 1983 have been clearly  defined under the said Rules.

Desirability of fixing chemical composition for the  firecrackers

       The learned Amicus Curiae has suggested that the  Government of India should fix the permissible chemical  compositions for the firecrackers.  He submitted ___ "To control the  noise levels from firecrackers, it was felt that apart from  firecrackers carrying on its label, the extent of its noise level  emission, it may be appropriate if the Government was to fix norms  regarding chemical composition and the size of firecrackers so as to  confirm to the notified noise emission norms."   

In UK as well, the method of determining the noise level of a  firecracker, is by fixing its chemical contents. The British Standard  Institute has developed the British Standard Fireworks, Part 2.  Specification for Fireworks (BS 7114: Part 2) of 1988, which  prescribes the maximum permissible quantity of chemicals in a  particular firework. The Standards prescribe the various  specifications with which the firework has to comply for it to be  manufactured or used in UK.  

        During the course of hearing, submissions in extenso were  made on the comparative merits and demerits of the two systems  namely (i) measuring the noise level of firecrackers in decibels and  thereby securing the implementation of rules in this regard, and (ii)  securing the implementation of the rules by restricting and  prescribing the size of chemical content, chemical composition etc.  of firecrackers.  A tabulated statement of such comparison has been  placed on the record by the Tamil Nadu Fireworks and Amorces   Manufacturers Association.   

       Briefly stated, it is pointed out that if the firecrackers are  allowed to be manufactured in the manner in which they are being  done now and the noise level is left to be measured at the time of  bursting of firecrackers, several difficulties in implementation would  arise, frustrating the regulation.  Very expensive instruments and  gadgets are necessary to measure the sound level of firecrackers.   A sound level meter with required capabilities may cost around Rs.3  lacs or upwards. Factors like wind velocity, temperature and  humidity have a bearing on the measurement of noise level.  The  gadgets for monitoring these factors shall also be required to be  installed at the testing field.  Technically trained persons would be  required to be posted at every point of measuring.   Testing the  sound level of firecrackers at the point of bursting would mean that  the firecrackers have already reached the market.  The persons to  be hauled up  would be unwary retailers or users and it would be  difficult to fix the responsibility on the manufacturers or  distributors.  Difficulties of proof in the court of law would also  arise.  The noise level in a firecracker is not stable.  The same  firecracker may have a different noise level at the time of  manufacturing and at the time of use on account of climatic  changes which would naturally occur by the lapse of time and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 29 of 37  

change of place.  If the noise level was to be tested at the factory,  the firecracker would have already been manufactured. There would  also be other difficulties inasmuch as the clearance for marketability  would depend on the firecrackers satisfying the test carried out and  at that point of time the firecrackers have already been  manufactured and shall have to be only destroyed if unsuccessful in  the test.   That apart, the manufactures are spread throughout the  country.  Some of them are small scale industries.  Either many a  testing stations shall have to be established or else the  manufacturers would be required to go to centralized testing  stations carrying untested firecrackers.  Both seem to be difficult  situations.  

       On the other hand, prescribing of weight and composition  of  chemicals to be used in manufacturing firecrackers would mean  experiment or analytical tests being carried out at any one station  followed by publication of results and laid down standards.     Experimental checks would be enough to satisfy the authorities, if  the manufacturers were following the laid down standards as to size  of firecrackers, weight and percentile composition of chemicals  used. This system would enable identification of illegal firecrackers  with comparatively more ease.  Size and mass of charge are two  basic factors that determine the noise level of a firecracker.  By  restricting these two prime factors, noise standard is achieved more  effectively.  Though other factors like climatic conditions may affect  the noise level to some extent, but this system seems to us to be  more dependable and logical, at least on the materials made  available before us.  

On a comparison of the two systems, i.e. the present system  of evaluating firecrackers on the basis of noise levels, and the other  where the firecrackers shall be evaluated on the basis of their  chemical composition, we feel that a change in the method of  evaluating the firecrackers shall surely be more beneficial. It shall  reduce the expenditure that shall otherwise have to be incurred on  expensive instruments that are necessary for the purpose of  measuring sound. The firecrackers shall easily be identifiable on the  basis of their mass of charge, and weight of the chemicals  contained in the firecrackers can also be easily measured. There  shall not be too much need of the personnel technically qualified for  measuring sound, as what would then be needed, would be to  simply weigh the chemical constituents. It shall to a great extent  also be successful in putting an end to illegal fireworks, which come  in bigger sizes, as they now shall be more easily identifiable. In  short the implementation of the rules relating to firecrackers shall  be easier and carried out by the enforcing authority more easily.  

Keeping all these considerations and the various submissions  made before this Court in mind we are of the opinion that a method  as proposed by the learned Amicus Curiae, of fixing the maximum  chemical composition for each and every firecracker, keeping in  mind the limit of 125dB(AI) as the maximum permissible limit,  should be adopted. Every manufacturer should on the box of each  firecracker mention details of its chemical contents as well. In case  of a failure on the part of the manufacturer to mention these details  or in cases where the contents of the box do not match to the  chemical formulae as stated on their box, the manufacturer shall be  liable for criminal prosecution.  

       The Department of Explosives should in public interest  undertake necessary research activity for the purpose and come out  with the chemical formulae for each firecracker. The Department  shall at the time of giving the license for manufacturing a particular  firecracker shall specify the ratio as well as the maximum  permissible weight of every chemical used for the purpose.  

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 30 of 37  

Response during hearing         The civic awareness towards prevention of noise pollution in  India is not as high as is expected.  It is regrettable to see that  people indulge into making noise beyond tolerable limits and create  health hazard unmindful of consequences which are likely to befall  not only on others but also on themselves who create noise.  The  enactment of laws has failed to create the requisite awareness.   The best time to create awareness is in the childhood.  At middle- school level education and in the age of adolescence the children  should be taught in the schools, and in the homes as well by the  parents___ What are the consequences of noise pollution and how  much health hazard is created by bursting firecrackers?   

       An awareness towards protecting the environment from all  sorts of pollutants and destructive activities needs to be created in  the minds at an younger age.  Suitable courses of study need to be  devised by preparing text-books to be handed down to the youth in  its shaping age and whilst they are still in schools.

       We are happy to note the way the people of the country and  especially the younger generation has responded to the interim  order made from time to time by this Court.  News reports came to  our notice wherein certain schools were stated to have organized  special lectures for the children pointing out the adverse effects of  noise pollution created by firecrackers just before the schools  closed for Diwali festival.  The children decided not to burst  firecrackers during Diwali Festival.  Some volunteered and took a  vow to burst such firecrackers as do not create intolerable noise  and confining their such fun and frolic only to the hours of the day  and not to do so during the hours of night.  Such a response from  young boys and girls who are our future and the educational  institutions on whom lie the responsibility of shaping the future of  this country is most welcome.

       Certain incidental and associated issues require to be dealt  with and that we do hereafter.

Fixing of time limit for bursting firecrackers ___ Is relaxation  desirable for festivals?

       The learned Amicus Curiae in his suggestions filed on 17th  September 2001 had suggested that the "Bursting of crackers  should be prohibited during night time, between 10.00 p.m. and  06.00 a.m.".   The Court had agreed and directed, vide Order dated  27.9.2001 ___ "The use of fireworks or firecrackers shall not be  permitted except between 6.00 a.m. and 10.p.m. No fireworks or  firecrackers shall be used between 10.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m.  The  Government of India, has also expressed its opinion that there  should be no relaxation in the time limit for bursting firecrackers.   Relaxation of restrictions on bursting of crackers from 10.00 p.m. to  6.00 a.m. shall not be given as it is night time. During the night  time, people sleep and the high level of noise has deleterious  effects on the health and well being of the people."  

       Several interlocutory applications have been filed in this  Court, wherein it was pleaded that restriction on bursting of  firecrackers in the night should be removed during the Diwali  Festival.  Similar relaxation was demanded for other festivals.   These applications highlighted practices prevalent in some of the  western countries wherein such relaxation is allowed.  We do not  think that we will be justified in granting any such relaxation.   Indian society is pluralistic.  People of this great country belong to  different castes and communities, have belief in different religions

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 31 of 37  

and customs and celebrate different festivals.  We are tolerant for  each other.  There is unity in diversity.  If relaxation is allowed to  one there will be no justification for not permitting relaxation to  others and if we do so the relaxation will become the rule.  It will be  difficult to enforce the restriction.

The Calcutta High Court in the case of Moulana Mufti Syed  Md. Noorur Rehman Barkati v. State of West Bengal  AIR  (1999) Calcutta 15 has expressed the following view:  

"The condition of the European countries, England  and America cannot be equated with the condition  prevailing in the State of West Bengal, particularly in  the City of Calcutta. \005.West Bengal has got its own  peculiar problem and this Court cannot decide a matter  looking at the Europe or America where the amenities  and the facilities are better. Density of population is  very thin. Roads are maintained in a perfect order.  Traffic noise is insignificant. The use of horns by  vehicles is a thing which is prohibited there unless in  case of emergency. People are disciplined. Traffic  moves in a disciplined manner. No horns are there. The  Ambient Noise Level in those countries are not at par  with those noise level in the City of Calcutta and/or in  different parts of State of West Bengal.           Accordingly, whatever may be decided by the  European countries or America, cannot have any direct  bearing on the fixation of the sound level in the State of  West Bengal. In other civilized countries, cars move  without making any noise or sound.  Condition of the  roads is such that it cannot create any noise beyond  tolerance. People in those countries are not in the habit  of creating unnecessary sounds but in our country  because of the gift of the technology sound has become  a source of pleasure for few people including some  young people.   Use of unnecessary horn in vehicles has  become a part and parcel of Indian culture".

       The picture of the entire country compared with the State of  West Bengal does not bear any material difference. Thus a rule,  practice or provision as to relaxation in Europe or America may not  be of much help for us.  They do not have many festivals or  celebrations round the year.  Their festivals and events are only at  national level and one for all, unlike ours.  Further, in the European  countries or even in America an insignificant percentage of the  population indulges in bursting crackers. Very few families, mainly  Indian, in these countries celebrate the festival of Diwali and burst  crackers. Thus the noise pollution produced by this small use of  firecrackers is not a cause of worry in these countries.  

       The situation in India is almost the opposite. The streets are  congested and the density of population per square kilometer is  one of the highest in the world. Firecrackers are burst in almost all  the houses, thus leading to pollution in the form of noise and  smoke___ both on a large scale, making it a cause of worry.      

       It is a judicially noticeable fact that in advanced countries  there is a move for collective celebration of festivals. For example,  in United States, on May Day, a show of fireworks is arranged  outside the city.  People assemble in large numbers to witness such  show which is officially arranged by the State.  Such example can  be emulated in our country.  People belonging to that section of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 32 of 37  

society which wishes to celebrate a festival or an occasion may be  encouraged to organize such event collectively and may have a  show of fireworks away from the residential locality.  Such a move  would save the people from the hazardous effects of noise pollution  caused by fireworks and at the same time bring the people  together and contribute in developing closeness, unity and  brotherhood.

       In our opinion the total restriction on bursting firecrackers  between 10 pm and 6 am must continue without any relaxation in  favour of anyone.   

Whether such restriction is violative of Article 25 of the  Constitution ?

          The affidavit filed by Mr. Mariappan, the Secretary of the  Tamil Nadu Fireworks and Amorces Manufacturers Association,  alleges the restriction on bursting firecrackers to amount to  infringement of religious rights under Article 25.  He says ___ "Therefore, the interference with the  date and time of celebrating the festivals,  amounts to infringement of religious rights  under Article 25 and the limitation under  Article 21 does not cause any health hazard."    

       The Court by restricting the time of bursting the firecrackers  has not in any way violated the religious rights of any person as  enshrined under Article 25 of the Constitution. The festival of Diwali  is mainly associated with pooja performed on the auspicious day  and not with firecrackers. In no religious text book it is written that  Diwali has to be celebrated by bursting crackers. Diwali is  considered as a festival of lights not of noises.  Shelter in the name  of religion cannot be sought for, for bursting firecrackers and that  too at odd hours.

       Another argument that has been put forward to remove the  restriction during festivals is that they are celebrated by most of the  people and that an inconvenience to a few should not become the  reason for restraining a greater lot.   

In P.A. Jacob v. Superintendent of Police, Kottayam ,  AIR 1993 Kerala 1, it has been said "However wide a right is, it  cannot be as wide, as to destroy similar or other rights in others.   Jefferson said: No one has a natural right to commit aggression on  the equal rights of another.  J.S. Mill said: If all mankind minus one  were of one opinion, and if only one person was of contrary opinion,  mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person,  than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing  mankind."

       If at all the people feel it necessary to burst firecrackers they  can choose and go for such firecrackers which on being burst emit  colours or lights mainly and produce very little or no sound.  Their  use can be permitted.  The Department of Explosives can, while  working out formulae for firecrackers, also along side classify the  crackers into two categories that could be: (i) sound emitting  crackers, and (b) colours/light emitting crackers. A few examples of  such colour emitting crackers are, snake tablets, sparklers, pencils,  hunters, chakri, colour rockets, flowerpots, parachutes, etc.    Category (b) firecrackers may not have restriction as to timings.  Though, it would need expert examination and opinion if colour  emitting crackers also emit fumes and gases which though not  source of noise pollution yet would cause air pollution, equally bad.  

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 33 of 37  

Till such time the Department of Explosives makes any such  classification there shall be a total ban on bursting of firecrackers  between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.

Can an exception be carved out for firecrackers meant for  export exclusively.

Should the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, be  amended in such a way that the firecrackers manufactured for  export and use in other countries are exempted from the Indian  noise standards?

Mr. Mariappan, the Secretary of The Tamil Nadu Fireworks  and Amorces Manufactures’ Association, had in his affidavit dated   8th February 2002, requested the Court to remove the restriction on  manufacturing fireworks meant for exporting only and which are in  excess of the sound levels prescribed for fireworks within the  country.  It is submitted, "the Indian Standards on noise of  firecrackers do not have any relevance to firecrackers intended for  export. But the order of the Hon’ble Supreme court prohibits  manufacture of firecrackers generating noise level exceeding 125  dB(AI) or 145 dB(C)pk at 4 maters distance from the point of  bursting. There is a total restriction on the manufacture of fireworks  and crackers without any discrimination being made between  firecrackers that are manufactured for use in India and those for  use in foreign countries. The trade having been globalised, Indian  firecrackers have to necessarily comply with foreign standards if  they are to enter into the international markets. The Department of  Explosives is already having various provisions laid down under the  Explosives Act, 1884 and the Explosives Rules, 1983, which govern  the export of fireworks. Prior approval from the Department  of  Explosives is imperative for every export of fireworks. Therefore the  comprehensive position now imposed on firecrackers should be  modified exempting firecrackers that are manufactured for use in  foreign countries, from the purview of the Environment (Protection)  Act 1986 and the Rules framed thereunder."  

The Court on the above-mentioned submission sought for the  view of the Department of Explosives. The Department has  expressed the view that firecrackers that are to be sold in foreign  countries may be excluded from the purview of the noise standards  provided they conform to the rules for  manufacturing  the   goods    for   export.  They also submitted ___ "The firecrackers  manufactured and sold for export purpose may be excluded from  the purview of the firecrackers’ noise standards provided they  follow the rules for manufacturing of goods for export. This will  enable the manufacturers to compete in the world market with the  other suppliers of firecrackers. The firecrackers manufactured for  export shall have a different colour code and a clear print indicating  that they are not to be sold in India."  

       We are inclined to agree with the view of the Department of  Explosives. Firecrackers for the purpose of export may be  manufactured and bear higher noise levels subject to the following  conditions: (i) The manufacturer should be permitted to do so only  when he has an export order with him and not otherwise; (ii) The  noise levels for these firecrackers should conform to the noise  standards prescribed in the country to which they are intended to  be exported as per the export order; (iii) These firecrackers should  have a different colour packing, from those intended to be sold in  India; (iv)  The firecrackers should have a clear print on them  stating that they are not to be sold in India.  In case these  firecrackers are found being sold in Indian territory, then the  manufacturer and the dealer selling these goods should be held

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 34 of 37  

liable.

How to check/control noise pollution         The need for checking noise pollution as highlighted by the  petitioners and several intervenors deserves appreciation.

       Need for specific legislation to control and prevent noise  pollution still needs some emphasis.  Undoubtedly, some laws have  been enacted.  Yet, compared with the legislation in developed  countries India is still lagging behind in enacting adequate and  scientific legislations.  We need to have one simple but specific and  detailed legislation dealing with several aspects referable to noise  pollution and providing measures of control therefor.   

       There is an equal need of developing mechanism and  infrastructure for enforcement of the prevalent laws.  Those who  are entrusted with the task of enforcing laws directed towards  controlling noise pollution, must be so trained as to acquire  expertise in the matter of fighting against noise pollution by taking  preventing and deterrent measures both.  They need to be  equipped with the requisite equipments such as audio meters as  would help them in detecting the level of noise pollution more so  when it crosses the permissible limits and the source thereof.

       Above all, there is need for creating general awareness  towards the hazardous effects of noise pollution.  Particularly, in our  country the people generally lack consciousness of the ill effects  which noise pollution creates and how the society including they  themselves stand to benefit by preventing generation and emission  of noise pollution.  The target area should be educational  institutions and more particularly schools.  The young children of  impressionable age should be motivated to desist from playing with  firecrackers, use of high sound producing equipments and  instruments on festivals, religious and social functions, family get- togethers and celebrations etc. which cause noise pollution.   Suitable chapters can be added into text-books which teach civic  sense  to the children and teach them how to be good and  responsible citizen which would include learning by heart of various  fundamental duties and that would obviously include learning not to  create noise pollution and to prevent if generated by others.   Holding of special talks and lectures can be organized in the schools  to highlight the menace of noise pollution and the role of the  children in preventing it.  For these purposes the State must play  its role by the support and cooperation of non-government  organizations (NGOs) can also be enlisted.

Similar awareness needs to be created in police and civil  administration by means of carrying out a special drive to make  them understand the various measures to curb the problems and  the laws on the subject.   Resident Welfare Associations (RAWs),  service clubs (such as Rotary International and Lions International)  and societies engaged in preventing noise pollution as part of their  projects need to be encouraged and actively involved by the local  administration.  Festival and ceremonies wherein the fireworks and  crackers are customarily burst can be accompanied by earmarking  a place and time wherein and when all the people can come  together and witness or view a show of fireworks dispensing with  the need of crackers being burst in the residential areas and that  too which is done without any regard to timings.  The  manufacturers can be encouraged to make such fireworks as would  display more the colours rather than make noise.

       Not only the use of loudspeakers and playing of hi-fi amplifier  systems has to be regulated even the playing of high sound  instruments like drums, tom-toms, trumpets, bugles and the like

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 35 of 37  

which create noise beyond tolerable limits need to be regulated.   The law enforcing agencies must be equipped with necessary  instruments and facilities out of which sound level meters  conforming to Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) code are a bare  necessity.

       Preventive measures need to be directed more effectively at  the source.  To illustrate, the horns which if fitted with the  automobiles would create hawking sound beyond permissible limits,  should not be allowed to be manufactured or sold in the market as  once they are available they are likely to be used.

Loudspeakers and amplifiers or other equipments or gadgets  which produce offending noise once detected as violating the law,  should be liable to be seized and confiscated by making provision in  the law in that behalf.

       Prohibiting the sale of such firecrackers which create noise  pollution by producing noise beyond permissible limits is practically  unmanageable.  A better option certainly is to prescribe the  chemical contents and composition for each type of firecrackers to  effectively curb noise pollution.  The Chief Controller of Explosives   has also been agreeable to take steps in this regard but has pointed  out difficulties attributable to shortage of personnel and non- availability of lab facilities and requisite equipments for this  purpose.

       We hasten to add that during the course of the proceedings  the parties have been generally agreeable to solicit directions on  the lines as indicated hereinabove.  There should be no difficulty in  issuing directions and ensuring compliance to the extent as  indicated hereinabove.  Wherever there are difficulties they have to  be sorted out in the larger public interest.

DIRECTIONS It is hereby directed as under:-     

I.      Firecrackers  

1.      On a comparison of the two systems, i.e. the present  system of evaluating firecrackers on the basis of noise levels,  and the other where the firecrackers shall be evaluated on the  basis of chemical composition, we feel that the latter method  is more practical and workable in Indian circumstances.  It  shall be followed unless and until replaced by a better system.

2. The Department of Explosives (DOE) shall undertake  necessary research activity for the purpose and come out with  the chemical formulae for each type or category or class of  firecrackers. The DOE shall specify the proportion/composition  as well as the maximum permissible weight of every chemical  used in manufacturing firecrackers.  

3. The Department of Explosives may divide the firecrackers  into two categories- (i) Sound emitting firecrackers, and (ii)  Colour/light emitting firecrackers.  

4. There shall be a complete ban on bursting sound emitting  firecrackers between 10 pm and 6 am.  It is not necessary to  impose restrictions as to time on bursting of colour/light  emitting firecrackers.     

5. Every manufacturer shall on the box of each firecracker

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 36 of 37  

mention details of its chemical contents and that it satisfies  the requirement as laid down by DOE. In case of a failure on  the part of the manufacturer to mention the details or in  cases where the contents of the box do not match the  chemical formulae as stated on the box, the manufacturer  may be held liable.  

6. Firecrackers for the purpose of export may be  manufactured bearing higher noise levels subject to the  following conditions: (i) The manufacturer should be  permitted to do so only when he has an export order with him  and not otherwise;(ii) The noise levels for these firecrackers  should conform to the noise standards prescribed in the  country to which they are intended to be exported as per the  export order; (iii) These firecrackers should have a different  colour packing, from those intended to be sold in India; (iv)  They must carry a declaration printed thereon something like  ’not for sale in India’ or ’only for export to country AB’ and so  on.

II.     Loudspeakers 1.      The noise level at the boundary of the public place,  where loudspeaker or public address system or any other  noise source is being used  shall not exceed 10 dB(A) above  the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB(A)  whichever is lower.  

2.      No one shall beat a drum or tom-tom or blow a trumpet  or beat or sound any instrument or use any sound amplifier at  night (between 10. 00 p.m. and 6.a.m.) except in public  emergencies.    3.      The peripheral noise level of privately owned sound  system shall not exceed by more than 5 dB(A) than the  ambient air quality standard specified for the area in which it  is used, at the boundary of the private place.

III.    Vehicular Noise No horn should be allowed to be used at night (between 10  p.m. and 6 a.m.) in residential area except in exceptional  circumstances.  

IV.     Awareness 1.      There is a need for creating general awareness towards  the hazardous effects of noise pollution. Suitable chapters  may be added in the text-books which teach civic sense to  the children and youth at the initial/early level of education.  Special talks and lectures be organised in the schools to  highlight the menace of noise pollution and the role of the  children and younger generation in preventing it. Police and  civil administration should be trained to understand the  various methods to curb the problem and also the laws on the  subject.  

2.      The State must play an active  role in this process.  Resident Welfare Associations, service Clubs and Societies  engaged in preventing noise pollution as a part of their  projects need to be encouraged and actively involved by the  local administration.  

3.      Special public awareness campaigns in anticipation of  festivals, events and ceremonial occasions whereat  firecrackers are likely to be used, need to be carried out.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 37 of 37  

       The abovesaid guidelines are issued in exercise of power  conferred on this Court under Articles 141 and 142 of the  Constitution of India.  These would remain in force until modified by  this Court or superseded by an appropriate legislation.  

V       Generally 1.  The States shall make provision for seizure and  confiscation of loudspeakers, amplifiers and such other  equipments as are found to be creating noise beyond the  permissible limits.

2.      Rule 3 of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control)  Rules, 2000 makes provision for specifying ambient air quality  standards in respect of noise for different areas/zones,  categorization of the areas for the purpose of implementation  of noise standards, authorizing the authorities for  enforcement and achievement of laid down standards. The  Central Government/State Governments shall take steps for  laying down such standards and notifying the authorities  where it has not already been done.

       Though, the matters are closed consistently with the  directions as above issued in public interest, there will be liberty of  seeking further directions as and when required and in particular in  the event of any difficulty arising in implementing the directions.         

       The CWP, CA and all pending IAs be treated as disposed of.

       Before parting, we would like to place on record our deep  appreciation of valuable assistance rendered by Shri Jitendra  Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sandeep Narain,  Advocate (and earlier by late Shri Pankaj Kalra, Advocate)  

who highlighted several relevant aspects of the issues before us  and also helped in formulating the guidelines issued as above.