# [2005] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 624

- **Citation:** [2005] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 624
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2005-07-18
- **Bench:** R.C. Lahoti, Ashok Bhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/2005-supp-1-s-c-r-624-20800
- **Pages:** 60

## Headnote

Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 21 and 19(/)(a)-Right to live
in freedom from noise pollution-Held, is a fundamental right protected by
C Article 21-Noise pollution beyond permissible limits is an in-road on that
right-Right of freedom of speech and expression under Art.19(/)(a) is not
absolute and cannot be pressed to defeat Art.21.
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, /9BJ-Section 2(a)-
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986-Sections 2(c) and 2(b)-Noise
D pollution-What is-Held: Disturbance produced in environment by
undesirable sound of various kinds is "noise pollution"-Words and Phrases-
"Noise" and_ "pollutant"-Meaning of
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986-Section 3-Environmenl-
(Protection) Rules, 1986-Rules 3, 5 and 89-Noise Pollution (Regulation ·
E and Control) Rules, 2000-Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989-Rules 119
and 120-Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 141 and 142:
Noise Pollution-Jn context to fire-crackers-Directions/guidelines issued
by Supreme Court under Arts. 141 and 142 of the Consti~ution-Held:
Bursting of sound emitting firecrackers completely banned between 10 pm
F and 6 am but no restrictions as to time on bursting of colour/light emitting
firecrackers-Fire-crackers to be evaluated on basis of chemical composition
rather than on basis of noise levels-Such method to be followed unless and
until replaced by a better system-Manufacturers to mention on box of each
fire cracker details of its chemical contents and that it satisfies the
G requirements laid down by Department o/Explosives (DOE)-However fire
crackers manufactured for export can bear higher noise levels subject to
conditions. Noise Pollution-In context to loudspeakers/public address system,
musical instruments and privately owned sound system-Directions/guidelines ·
issued by Supreme Court under Arts. 141and142 of the Coristitutioh-Held:
Noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker or public
H
624
)
IN RE: NOISE POLL.-IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE . .t HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 625
address system or any other noise source is being used not to exceed 10 A
dB(A) above the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB(A) whichever
is lower-No one to beat 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-Peripheral noise level of
privately owned sound system not to exceed by more than 5 dB(A) from the B
ambient air quality standard specified for the area in which it is used, at the
boundary of the private place-States to make provision for seizure and
confiscation of loudspeakers, amplifiers and such other equipments found
creating noise beyond permissible limits.
Noise Pollution-In context to vehicular noise-Directions/guidelines c
issued by Supreme Court under Arts. 141and142 of the Constitution-Held:
Horn not to be used at night between 10 PM to 6 AM in residential area
except in exceptional circumstances.
Noise pollution-Hazardous effects of-Awareness about-Held: Needs
to he created-Suitable chapters can be added in text-books for children D
an~ youth at the initial/early level of education-Special talks and lectures
be organised in schools-Police and civil administration be trained to
understand various methods to curb the problem and also the laws on the
subject-State to play an active role in this process~Resident Welfare
Associations, Service Clubs and Societies engaged in preventing noise E
pollution to be actively involved by the local administration-Special public
awareness campaigns in anticipation of festivals, events and ceremonial
occasions whereat firecrackers are likely to be used, to be carried out.
J
Noise pollution-Ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for
different areas/zones-Central Govt./State Govt. asked to take steps for laying F
down such standards and notifying the authorities where it has not already
been done.
'
Certain issues of far

## Text

_Characters 0–39,965 of 139,529. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39965 for what follows._

A
IN RE: NOISE POLLUTION - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LAWS FOR
RESTRICTING USE OF LOUDSPEAKERS AND HIGH VOLUME
PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS
JULY 18, 2005
B
[R.C. LAHOTI, CJ. AND ASHOK BHAN, J.)
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 21 and 19(/)(a)-Right to live
in freedom from noise pollution-Held, is a fundamental right protected by
C Article 21-Noise pollution beyond permissible limits is an in-road on that
right-Right of freedom of speech and expression under Art.19(/)(a) is not
absolute and cannot be pressed to defeat Art.21.
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, /9BJ-Section 2(a)-
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986-Sections 2(c) and 2(b)-Noise
D pollution-What is-Held: Disturbance produced in environment by
undesirable sound of various kinds is "noise pollution"-Words and Phrases-
"Noise" and_ "pollutant"-Meaning of
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986-Section 3-Environmenl-
(Protection) Rules, 1986-Rules 3, 5 and 89-Noise Pollution (Regulation ·
E and Control) Rules, 2000-Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989-Rules 119
and 120-Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 141 and 142:
Noise Pollution-Jn context to fire-crackers-Directions/guidelines issued
by Supreme Court under Arts. 141 and 142 of the Consti~ution-Held:
Bursting of sound emitting firecrackers completely banned between 10 pm
F and 6 am but no restrictions as to time on bursting of colour/light emitting
firecrackers-Fire-crackers to be evaluated on basis of chemical composition
rather than on basis of noise levels-Such method to be followed unless and
until replaced by a better system-Manufacturers to mention on box of each
fire cracker details of its chemical contents and that it satisfies the
G requirements laid down by Department o/Explosives (DOE)-However fire
crackers manufactured for export can bear higher noise levels subject to
conditions. Noise Pollution-In context to loudspeakers/public address system,
musical instruments and privately owned sound system-Directions/guidelines ·
issued by Supreme Court under Arts. 141and142 of the Coristitutioh-Held:
Noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker or public
H
624
)
IN RE: NOISE POLL.-IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE . .t HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 625
address system or any other noise source is being used not to exceed 10 A
dB(A) above the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB(A) whichever
is lower-No one to beat 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-Peripheral noise level of
privately owned sound system not to exceed by more than 5 dB(A) from the B
ambient air quality standard specified for the area in which it is used, at the
boundary of the private place-States to make provision for seizure and
confiscation of loudspeakers, amplifiers and such other equipments found
creating noise beyond permissible limits.
Noise Pollution-In context to vehicular noise-Directions/guidelines c
issued by Supreme Court under Arts. 141and142 of the Constitution-Held:
Horn not to be used at night between 10 PM to 6 AM in residential area
except in exceptional circumstances.
Noise pollution-Hazardous effects of-Awareness about-Held: Needs
to he created-Suitable chapters can be added in text-books for children D
an~ youth at the initial/early level of education-Special talks and lectures
be organised in schools-Police and civil administration be trained to
understand various methods to curb the problem and also the laws on the
subject-State to play an active role in this process~Resident Welfare
Associations, Service Clubs and Societies engaged in preventing noise E
pollution to be actively involved by the local administration-Special public
awareness campaigns in anticipation of festivals, events and ceremonial
occasions whereat firecrackers are likely to be used, to be carried out.
J
Noise pollution-Ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for
different areas/zones-Central Govt./State Govt. asked to take steps for laying F
down such standards and notifying the authorities where it has not already
been done.
'
Certain issues of far-reaching implications in day-to-day life of the
.J
people in India relatable to noise pollution vis-a-vis right to life enshrined in
-t
Article 21 of the Constitution as interpreted in its wide sweep by the G
constitutional courts of the country were raised in the present matters.
Though, the sweep of hearing in these matters was very wide, the
principal thrust was directed towards noise created by firecrackers,
loudspeakers used-by political parties, at religious places and on religious
and social occasions or festivals. In addition some of the intervenors inter- H
626
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. l S.C.R.
, A alia sought for noise created by horns of engines, pressure horns in
automobiles, denting painting of cars, particularly, in residential areas and
from unauthorized premises being prohibited.
Consequently several questions, such as what is noise; what are its
adverse effects; whether noise pollution runs in conflict with the fundamental
., B rights of the people and what relief can be allowed by way of directions issued
in public interest arose for consideration.
Disposing of the matters, the Court
HELD: 1.1. Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees life and personal
C liberty to all persons. It is well settled 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 oflife which go
to make a person's life meaningful, complete and worth living. Anyone who
wishes to live in peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a right to
prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him. No one can claim a right to create
D 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
E surrounding_ circumstances, the place and the time. {635-F-H]
1.2. 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
F has a right to speech, others have a right to listen or decline to listen. Nobody
can be compelled to listen znd nobody can claim that he has a right to make
his voice trespass into the ea_rs or mind of others. Nobody can indulge into
aural aggression. If anyone increases his volume of speech and that too with
the assistance of artificial devices so as to compulsorily expose un~illing
G persons to hear a noise raised to unpleasant or obnoxious levels then the person
speaking ;s. violating the right of others to a peaceful, comfortable and
pollution-free life guaranteed by Article 21. Article 19(l)A cannot be pressed
into service for defeating the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21.
[636-B-EJ
H
Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan Chand Aggarwal alias Bhagatji v. Govt.
.>
~-
II"
IN RE: NOISE POLL.·IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE. & HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 62 7
of NCT of Delhi and Ors, AIR (2001) Delhi 455 (D.B.) and P.A. Jacob v. A
Superintendent of Police, Kottayam, AIR (1993) Kerala 1, approved. (636-E]
Om Birangana Religious Society v. State, 100 CWN 617, referred to.
(645-D]
2. The word noise is derived from the Latin term "nausea". Section 2{a)
of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, includes noise in
the definition of 'air pollutant'. "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 ~f 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 ofvarious
kinds is called" noise pollution". (636-H; 637-B-F; 638-A]
P.S. Jaswal and Nisitha Jaswal:Environmental Law, 2nd Edition, 2003,
p.327; Parivesh Newsletter: Central Pollution Control Board, December,
1996; Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 16, 1968, p.558 and Chambers 20th
Century Dictionary, 1987 Edition, referred to.
3.1. The Indian Judicial opinion has been uniform in recognizing the
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.
Kirori Mal Bishambar Dayal v. The State, AIR (1958) Punjab 11; Bhuban
Ram and Ors. v. Bibhuti Bhushan Biswas, AIR (1919) Calcutta 539; Rabin
Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal, AIR (1985) Cal. 222; People United for
better Living in Calcutta v. State of West Bengal, AIR (1993) Cal. 215;
Burrabazar Fireworks Dealers Association v. Commissioner of police,
Calcutta, AIR (1998) Cal. 121; Appa Rao, MS. v. Govt. ofT.N., (1995) 1 LW
319 (Mad); P.A. Jacob v. the Superintendent of Police, AIR (1993) Kera la 1
and Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan Chand Aggarwal alias Bhagatji v. Govt.
ofNCT of Delhi and Ors, AIR (2001) Delhi 455, approved.
Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare
Assn., (2000) 7 SCC 282; Charan Lal Sahu v; Union of India, AIR (1990) SC
1480 and MC. Mehta v. Union of India, (2004) 1 SCC 571, relied on.
Ivour Heyden v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1984) Cd LJ (NOC) 16,
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
~
628
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. l S.C.R.
A referred to.
3.2. Though some laws have been enacted to control and prevent noise
pollution, yet, compared with the legislation in developed countries, India is
still lagging behind in enacting adequate and scientific legislations. There is
a need to have one simple but specific and detailed legislation dealing with
B several aspects referable to noise pollution and providing measures of control
therefor.
3.3. 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
C 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. [678-E]
D
3.4. There is need for creating general awareness towards the hazardo11s
effects of noise pollution. Particularly, in India 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 gener,tion
and emission of noise pollution. The target area should be educational
E institutions and more pal'.'ticularly schools. The young children of
impressionable age should be motivated to desist from playing with
firecrackers, use of high sound producing equipme~ts and instruments on
festivals, religious and social functions, family get-togethers and celebrations
etc. which cause noise pollution. Suit~ble chapters can be added into text-books
F 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
G State must play its role by enlisting support and cooperation of non-government
organizations (NGOs). [678-G, H; 679-A-B]
3.5. 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
H subject. Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs), service clubs (such as Rotary
IN RE: NOISE POLL.·IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OFLOUDSPE. & HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMs629
. . International and Lions International) and societies engaged in preventing A
noise pollution as part of their projects need to be encouraged and actively
involved by the local administration. Festivals and ceremonies wherein
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 B
without any regard to timings. The manufacturers can be encouraged to make
such fireworks as would display more the colours rather than make noise.
[679-C-E)
3.6. Not only the use of loudspeakers and playing of hi-fl amplifier C
systems has to be regulated even the playing of high sound instruments like
drums, tom-toms, trumpets, bugles and the like 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. (679-F)
D
3.7. 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. [679-G)
E
. 3.8. Loudspeakers and amplifiers or other equipments or gadgets which
produce offending noise once detected as violating the law, should be liable to
bC seized and conrascated by making provision·in the law In that behalf.
[679-H; 680-A)
3.9. Prohibiting the sal~ 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. [680-B)
Mou/ana Mufti Syed Md. Noorur Rehman Barkati v. State of West
Bengal, AIR (1999) Calcutta, 15, referred to.
·
F
G
4.1. There should be no difficulty in issuing directions and ensuring
compliance to the. extent as indieated hereinabove. Wherever there are
difficulties·they have to be sorted out in the larger public interest.
H
630
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.
A
4.2. Following directions are issued:
I. Firecrackers
i. On a comparison of the two systems, i.e. the present system of
evaluating fireci:-a~kers on the-basis of noise level~, and the other where the
B firecrackers shall be evaluated on the basis of chemical composition, the latter
method is more practical and workable in Indian circumstances. It shall be
followed unless and until replaced by a better system.
ii. The Department of Explosives (DOE) shall undertake necessary
research activity for the purpose and come out with the chemical formulae
C for each type or category or class of firecrackers .. The DOE shall specify the
proportion/composition as well as the ~aximum permissible weight of every
chemical used in manufacturing firecrackers.
iii. The Department of Explosives may divide the firecrackers into two
D categories- (i) Sound emitting firecrackers, and (ii) Colour/light emitting
firecrackers.
E
F
iv. 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.
v. Every manufacturer shall on .the box of each firecracker 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 o( the box do not match the chemical
formulae as stated on the box, the manufacturer may be held liable.
vi. 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
G 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. (680-D-H; 681-A-DJ
H
n. Loudspeakers
..
IN RE: NOISE POLL.-IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE.111. HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 631
i. The noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker A
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)
which'ever is lower.
ii. 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 B
p.m. and 6.a.m.) except in public emergencies.
iii. 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
i. 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
c
D
the menace of noise pollution and the role of the children and younger E
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.
ii. The State must play an active role in this process. Resident Welfare
Associations, service Clubs and Societies engaged in preventing noise F
pollution as a part of their projects need to be encouraged and actively involved
by the local ~dministration.
iii. Special _public awareness campaigns in anticipation of festivals,
events and ceremonial occasions whereat firecrackers are likely to be used,
need to be carried out.
G
The abovesaid guidelines are issued in exercise of power conferred on
this Court under Articles 141 and 142 of the Constitution oflndia. These
would remain in force until modified by this Court or superseded by an
appropriate legislation. (681-D-H; 682-A-D)
H
632
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005) SUPP. I S.C.R.
A
V. Generally
i. 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.
B
ii. 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/iones, 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
C Governments shall take steps for laying down such standards and notifying
the authorities where it has not already been done.
5. 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
D arising in implementing the directions. [682-D-G)
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (C) No. 72 of 1998.
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of lndia.)
E
WITH
C.A. No. 3735 of2005.
Raju Ramachandran, Additional Solicitor General, (NP), Jitendra Sharma,
(AC), N.N. Goswami, Rajiv Dutta, G.L. Sanghi, P.N. Mishra, R. Mohan, Sandeep
Narain, (AC),Anil Kumar Mittal, Mrs. Anjali Jha, M.K.S. Menon, M.K. Michael,
F Ms. Indra Sawhney, Ms. Meenakshi Arora, P. Panneswaran, Mrs. Anil Katiyar,
Dr. A. Francis Julian, Ms. A. Subhashini, D.S. Mahra, Ashok Bhan, Ms.Varuna
Bhandari Gugnani, Vijay Panjwani, K.R. Sasiprabhu, {NP), Jagjit Singh Chhabra,
{NP), Sanjay V.S. Choudhury, Ms. Niraj Kumar, V.K. Sidharthan, P.V. Yogeswaran,
S. Ravi Shankar, Ms.Yamunah Nachiarand M.A. Chinnaswamy with them for
G the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R.C. LAHOTI, CJ. These two matters before us raise certain issues of
far-reaching implications in day-to-day life of the people in India relatable to
H noise pollution vis-a-vis right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution
' '
-
IN RE: NOISE POLL.·IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LO\JDSPE. /Ir. HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 633
of India as interpreted in its wide sweep by the constitutional courts of the A
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.
B
Facts in WP.(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 C
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% bum 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 D
· systems ar.e 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-ti amplifiers and loudspeakers without any regard to timings.
Modem 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 before and
during examinations. The noise polluters have no regard for the inconvenience
E
and discomfort of the people in the vicinity. Nojse pollution has had its
victims in the past and continues to have victims today as well. The petiiioner
seeks to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court so that there may not be p
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. 3735of2005 (Arising out o/S.l.P.(C) No.21851103)
G
Leave granted.
The Government of India framed and published Noise Pollution Control
and Regulation Rules; 1999. On 11.10.2002 the Government oflndia brought
in an amendment in the Rules. The amendment empowered the State
Government to permit the use of loudspeaker or public address system during H
634
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.
A night hours (between IO 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
B and directed the petition to be dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, this petition llas
been filed by special leave.
The Civil Appeal and, in particular, the writ petition raise issues of wide
ranging dimensions relating to noise pollution and the implications thereof.
C Taking cognizance of the matters as public interest litigation, the Court vi de
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 Pollutionlmplementation of the
Laws for Restricting Voice of Loudspeakers and High Volume Producing
Sound Systems". The Court also appointed ~hri iltehder Sharma, Senior
Advocate and Shri Pankaj Kalra, Advocate to appear as Amicus Curiae. Both
D the learned counsel were present in the Court and accepted the assignment.
Unfortunately, Shri Pankaj Katra, Advocate expired during the pendency of
the proceedings. Shri Sandeep Narain Advocate has appeared in his place
and assisted the Court.
The Union of India and the Central Pollution Control Board have not
E oppos.ed 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
F difficulties in completely regulating and where necessary, eliminating noise
pollution.
Though, as we· have already noted, the sweep of hearing in ·th~se
matters has been very wide, the principal thrust of the writ petitioner and the
learned Amicus has. been di~ected fowards noise created by firecrackers,
G 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
Association and some individuals have sought for interventio!ls. It is not ...
necessary to notice the contents of the intervention applications in. detail.
H Suffice it to say that the reliefs sought for in the applications are conflicting.
IN RE: NOISE POLL.-IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE. & HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 63 5
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;
A
(ii) use of loudspeakers in religious places such as temples, mosque, B
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 C
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 D
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 E
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.
Artiele 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 person to life with human dignity. Therein
F
are included, all the aspects oflife which go to make a person's life meaningful,
complete and worth living. The human life has its charm and there is no G
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. No one 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 H
636
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2005) SUPP. I S.C.R.
A the effect of materially interfering ~ith 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, including the place and the time.
Those who make noise often take shelter behind Article 19(1 )A pleading
B 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
C 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 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
D pollution-free life guaranteed by Article 21. Article 19(l)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 five in
an atmosphere free from noise pollution has been upheld as the one guaranteed
E 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
Ors., AIR (2001) Delhi 455 (D.B.) and P.A. Jacob v. Superintendent of Police,
Kottayam, AIR (1993) Kerala I. We have carefully gone through the reasoning
adopted in the two decisions. and the principle of law laid down therein, in
. particulaF, the exposition of Article 21 of the Constitμtion. We find ourselves -
F in entire agreement therewith.
G
H
The present cases provide an opportunity for examining severar
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 what it is?
The word noise is derived from the Latin term "nausea". It has been
IN RE: NOISE pQLL.·IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE. & HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 63 7
defined as "unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication A
dumped into the environment with regard to the adverse effect it may have
on unwilling ears."1
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 others2•
B
Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981,
includes noise in the definition of 'air pollutant'.
Section 2(a) "air pollutant" means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance
including noise present in the atmosphere in such concentration as may be C
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.3"
According to Chambers 20th Century Dictio9ary4, 'noise' means Sound
especially of loud, harsh or confused kind; a sound of any kind; an over loud
or disturbing sound; frequent or public talk.
D
In Chamber,s 21st Century Dictionary, the definition of 'noise' has E
undergone a change. Noise pollution stands carved out as a phrase separately
from noise. The two are defined as under :
·
"Noise a sound; a harsh disagreeable sound, or such sound; a din.
pollution-an excessive or annoying degree of noise in a particular area, e.g.
from traffic or aeroplane engines."
F
"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 of any environmental pollutant. Section
2 (b) of the said Act defines "environmental pollutant" to mean any solid,
1P.S. Jaswal and Nistha Jaswal-Environmental Law, Second Edn., 2003, p. 327
2Parivesh Newsletter:· Central Pollution Control Board, December 1996.
3Vol.l6, 1968, p.558
41987 ed.
G
H
638
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005) SUPP. 1 S.C.R.
A liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or
tends to be injurious to environment.
B
Thus, the disturbance produced in our environment by the undesirable
sound of various kinds is called " noise pollution".
IJ
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. No one is immune to
C 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
D 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
E abilities. Noise pollution was previously confined to a few special areas like
factory or mill, but today it engulfs every nook and comer 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
F place. The regular rattling of engines and i':1termittent blowing of horns
emanating from the car(!.van of automobiles do not allow us to have any
respite from irritant noise even in suburban zones5 •
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
G pitch, its frequency and time pattern and length of exposure. Noise has both
auditory and non-auditory ~ffects depending upon the intensity and the
duration of the noise level6• It ·affects sleep, hearing, communication, mental
5Ranbir Singh, Noise Pollution: Environment and the law, as printed in India Bar Review,
Vol.23(3&4) 1996 p.86.
H
6P.S. Jaswal, Nistha Jaswal-Environmental law, Second Edn., p.331
...
IN RE: NOISE POLL.·IMPLE. OF THE LAWS FOR REST. USE OF LOUDSPE. & H.IGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMS 63 9
, 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.
A
Noise can disturb our work, rest, sleep, and communication. It can
damage our hearing and evoke other psychological, and possibly pathological B
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 analysis7•
Hearing Loss
c
"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 relatiV'ely short exposure to excessive noise. Pre-exposure
hearing is recovered fairly rapidly after cessation of the noise. Noise induced D
_ 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 E
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 practices9 • [N.B.- Hz. is abbreviation of Hertz
which is the unit of frequency, equal to one cycle per second. Hertz (Hz) is F
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
7Parivesh Newsletter: Central Pollution Control Board, December, _1996 at pg.4.
'Id.
9ld.
G
H
640
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R.
A 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 10•
B Disturbance of sleep.
c
Noise intrusion can cause difficulty in falling asleep and can awaken
people who are asleep 11 •
Annoyance
'Noise annoyance' may be defined as a feeling of displeasure evoked
by noise. 'The annoyance inducing c~pacity qf a noise depends-~pon many
of its physical characteristics and variations of these with time. However,
annoyance reactions are sensitive to many non-acoustic factors of a:. social,
D psychological, or economic nature and there are considerable differ~ces. in
individual reactions to the same noise12•
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
E 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 noise13 •
F
G
H
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.