The Supreme Court has called for a balance between religious sentiments and public health while considering restrictions on firecrackers in Delhi and neighbouring regions, with the Bench stressing awareness, safer practices and enforceable measures.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heading a three-judge Bench, said during the hearing on October 12 that the exercise should not hurt religious sentiments but should also encourage people to voluntarily choose less harmful options. “The whole exercise should involve a balancing approach,” he said.
The court was hearing the matter amid concerns over the health effects of air pollution associated with firecrackers. Senior advocate Aparajita Singh, the amicus curiae in the case, highlighted the risks for children, senior citizens and people with health vulnerabilities.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi also questioned the religious basis for bursting firecrackers during the proceedings. The observations place the issue within a wider public-health and urban-governance challenge: how restrictions intended to control pollution can be implemented in densely populated cities where enforcement is difficult and seasonal demand is high.
Ms. Singh suggested that the Commission for Air Quality Management, the statutory body responsible for air-quality management in the region, should be asked to focus on the medical concerns linked to air pollution. The Bench, however, cautioned against measures that could be difficult to enforce on the ground.
The Chief Justice said people should be made more aware of which firecrackers are harmful and which are less harmful. He also suggested promoting traditional practices such as lighting lamps and using sparklers, alongside restrictions on the availability of more harmful varieties.
The court’s approach indicates that the immediate question is not limited to whether restrictions should exist, but also how they can be communicated and enforced without creating rules that are impractical for local authorities to implement. The hearing also brings the responsibilities of air-quality institutions and public-health agencies into focus.
The matter will be heard next on October 15.
