In a crucial development, the Chhattisgarh High Court, while hearing a suo moto public interest litigation (PIL) concerning noise pollution, reaffirmed that amplified noise from DJ-mounted vehicles and similar sources poses serious risks to public health and violates environmental norms. The judgment, issued by a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru on October 21, 2024, underscores the need for strict enforcement of noise pollution laws, particularly during festival seasons.
Background of the Case:
The PIL, registered as WPPIL No. 88 of 2023, was initiated suo moto by the Chhattisgarh High Court, based on a series of news reports highlighting the alarming rise in noise pollution across the state, especially during the festive season. The reports indicated rampant use of DJ-mounted vehicles with loud sound amplifiers, resulting in noise levels far exceeding permissible limits. Concerns over the lack of a proper mechanism for addressing noise-related complaints prompted the court to intervene.
The respondents in this PIL include the Chief Secretary of Chhattisgarh and other state officials. The court also permitted interventions from concerned citizens, who filed applications pointing to the impact of excessive noise and flashing laser lights on public health and safety.
Legal Issues Addressed:
1. Enforcement of Noise Pollution Laws:
The central legal question was the effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms under existing noise pollution laws and whether the state authorities were fulfilling their obligations in regulating amplified sound levels during public events. The PIL examined:
– The lack of adequate action by state agencies despite clear legal frameworks.
– The need for a specific protocol for receiving and addressing complaints related to noise pollution.
2. Health Implications of Amplified Noise:
The court addressed the potential health hazards posed by excessive noise, including hearing loss, stress, and other psychological effects, particularly affecting children and the elderly. Concerns were also raised about laser lights used alongside sound systems, causing visual impairments.
3. Misuse of Authority Allegations:
During the proceedings, one of the intervenors alleged harassment by police officers, who were purportedly misusing the PIL to extort bribes from DJ operators, even those complying with court orders. The court sought a detailed response from the state to ensure that legitimate operators are not unduly harassed under the guise of law enforcement.
Key Observations by the Court:
While addressing the urgency of controlling noise pollution, the bench remarked:
“Amplified noise from DJ-mounted vehicles without proper checks not only violates noise pollution norms but also infringes upon the fundamental right to health of citizens.”
The court further observed that despite existing orders and regulations, effective implementation was lacking:
“The State must ensure that noise levels are maintained within permissible limits, especially during festivals, where public gatherings become hotspots of regulatory failure.”
The division bench directed the Collector/District Magistrate of Raipur to submit a personal affidavit by November 20, 2024, detailing the actions taken to enforce noise control measures and to prevent unauthorized use of DJ systems. The court also instructed the state to ensure that a clear complaint mechanism is established, enabling citizens to report violations easily.
The court emphasized:
“The right to a healthy environment is part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, and it is imperative that noise pollution is regulated effectively to uphold this right.”
Arguments Presented:
During the proceedings, Advocate General Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, assisted by Deputy Advocate General Mr. Shashank Thakur, represented the State of Chhattisgarh. They argued that the state had initiated multiple actions, such as fines and confiscation of equipment, against violators of noise pollution laws. They assured the court that steps were underway to further curb noise pollution and comply with the court’s directives.
On the other hand, counsel for intervenors, including Mr. Trivikram Nayak, Ms. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, and Mr. Veer Verma, highlighted instances of non-compliance and health hazards caused by loud DJs and flashing laser lights. They insisted that existing laws were ineffective without proper monitoring and enforcement at the grassroots level.
The court’s decision mandates:
– Enhanced Enforcement: The State must intensify enforcement measures, particularly during peak festival seasons, with stricter checks on sound levels.
– Citizen-Friendly Complaint Mechanism: Establishing an accessible complaint system for citizens to report noise violations.
– Protection of Legitimate Operators: The state must ensure that law-abiding DJ operators are not unfairly penalized and that allegations of police misconduct are thoroughly investigated.
