The Supreme Court is examining whether firecracker use during Diwali in Delhi-NCR should be restricted, as the bench weighs air pollution concerns against religious sentiments and practical enforcement.
Chief Justice Surya Kant said an immediate ban could lead people to burst crackers during the daytime. He said the court did not want to hurt anyone's religious feelings and would consider a balanced way forward.
The hearing focused on whether bursting firecrackers is connected to religious practice or protected as a fundamental religious right. One lawyer argued that prayer is part of religious faith, while bursting crackers is not. The lawyer also remarked that even God would be surprised by the argument.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked what connection firecrackers had with religion. Assisting the court, amicus curiae Aparajita Singh said the same argument was made every year. She added that people would be surprised if they knew that children were suffering and becoming ill in the name of God.
Court considers limited hours and public awareness
The bench said a practical and balanced approach was needed. The Chief Justice said there was still enough time to appeal to people and restrict firecracker use to specified hours.
The court also emphasised personal responsibility and public awareness. Chief Justice Surya Kant said citizens and civil society should understand their responsibility and remain conscious of the existing situation.
He said the court could consider steps to make people more aware. The Chief Justice also said self-reflection would be the best way to move forward, while maintaining that religious sentiments should not be hurt.
Singh said the ideal situation would be for these arguments and developments not to recur each year. She said, however, that the same debate and sequence of events were repeated annually.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the matter on 15 October.
Earlier arguments on restrictions
During an earlier hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that people should be allowed 2 days of celebration. He said the proposal related only to festivals including Diwali, Gurpurv and Christmas.
The court had also observed that a complete ban was neither practical nor an ideal solution. It asked whether air quality had improved or worsened after the ban introduced in 2018.
The Commission for Air Quality Management responded that pollution levels had remained almost the same, apart from the period of the Covid lockdown. That response has become part of the court's consideration of whether a complete prohibition produces the intended result.
The hearing therefore involves more than the question of whether firecrackers should be banned. The court is also considering when they may be used, how public cooperation can be encouraged and whether restrictions can be enforced without aggravating the dispute over religious practice.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has not announced a final approach in the material available here. It is considering a practical balance involving religious sentiments, public awareness, specified hours and the reported air-quality position, with the next hearing scheduled for 15 October.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What issue is the Supreme Court considering?
The court is considering restrictions on firecracker use during Diwali in Delhi-NCR, including the possibility of limiting use to specified hours.
Q. What did Chief Justice Surya Kant say about a complete ban?
He said that issuing a ban could lead people to burst firecrackers during the daytime.
Q. Did the Chief Justice say the court would disregard religious sentiments?
No. He said the court did not want to hurt religious feelings and would seek a balanced approach.
Q. What argument was made about religious rights?
A lawyer argued that prayer is part of religious faith, but bursting firecrackers is not a fundamental religious right.
Q. When will the Supreme Court hear the matter next?
The matter is scheduled to be heard on 15 October.
Q. What did the Commission for Air Quality Management say about pollution levels?
It said pollution levels had remained almost the same after the 2018 ban, apart from the Covid lockdown period.
