Calcutta High Court: A Division bench comprising of T.S. Sivagnanam*, CJ., and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J., held that continuous beating of drums throughout day and night during Muharam it is illegal and contrary to the relevant rules and issued direction to police and West Bengal Pollution Control Board to issue a public notice regulating the same.
Brief Facts
In the instant matter, the petitioner preferred a public interest writ petition seeking directions against the respondent (police) to stop severe noise pollution caused by the continuous beating of drums in various parts of the city. This beating of drums is carried out by a group of individuals as part of a mourning ritual on the occasion of Muharram. The petitioner seeks appropriate directions to stop the continuous beating of drums due to noise pollution, which poses a threat to public health and infringes on the rights of residents in the affected areas.
Parties’ Contentions
The petitioner contended that while there is a ban on using loudspeakers for Azan, the uninterrupted beating of drums with no restrictions on sound intensity is illegal and poses a serious threat to public health and welfare. The excessive noise affects the well-being of residents in the area, including school-going children, elderly individuals, and the sick, all of whom have been affected by the disturbance.
On the other hand respondents contended that the petitioner’s grievances have been addressed and appropriate action has been taken to regulate the period for beating of drums.
Court’s Observation
The Court refers to Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Assn., (2000) 7 SCC 282, wherein the Supreme Court considered a similar issue related to noise pollution in the name of religion and ruled that no religion prescribes disturbing the peace of others through noise pollution. The Court emphasized the need to protect the rights of residents affected by such disturbances and affirmed that fundamental rights must co-exist in harmony, i.e., the State must intervene to balance competing interests and protect the rights of citizens affected by such disturbances.
“…one can practice, profess and propagate religion, as guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution but that is not an absolute right. The provision of Article 25 is subject to the provisions of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and on a true and proper construction of the provisions of Article 25(1) and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, it cannot be said that the citizens should be coerced to hear anything, which he does not like or which he does not require.”
The Court referred to the relevant provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the rules framed thereunder for noise pollution levels as well as guidelines issued by the High Court of Madras in Appa Rao, M.S. v. Govt. of T.N., 1995 SCC OnLine Mad 94, for controlling noise pollution and emphasizes the need for implementing authorities to raise awareness about noise pollution regulations and enforce the relevant rules strictly. The Court also highlighted the adverse health effects of noise pollution, including serious nervous disorders, cardiovascular diseases, and emotional tension.
Court’s Directions
The Court issued certain directions and stressed that the directions must be followed without any deviation. The Court:
-
directed the police to immediately issue a public notice regulating the timing of drum beating and identify groups that may be permitted to perform it while maintaining permissible noise levels,
-
suggested the implementation of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for any future religious festivals or events involving the use of loudspeakers or musical instruments to prevent noise pollution,
-
addressed the issue of open-air kitchens causing a nuisance and directed the police to regulate such activities, and
-
instructed the West Bengal Pollution Control Board to issue a public notice regarding permissible noise levels and penalties for violations.
[Shagufta Sulaiman v. State of W.B., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 2179, order dated 27-07-2023]
*Judgment by Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Miss Shagufta Sulaiman, Counsel for the Petitioner (in person);
Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Ld. A.G.P. Mr. S. Adak, Counsel for the State;
Mr. N.C. Bihani Mrs. Papiya Banerjee Bihan, Counsel for the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.
Buy Constitution of India HERE
