Firecrackers detrimental to "mother nature": Karnataka High Court upholds ban on sale in Bangalore

Firecrackers apart from being a health hazard also causes enormous environmental pollution, the Karnataka High Court recently said while upholding the ban on sale of firecrackers in congested areas of Bangalore [M/s Madhi Trading Co. v The Joint Chief Controller of Explosives].Single-judge Justice Krishna S Dixit said that use of firecrackers imposes a significant burden on the environment, especially in congested cities which are already struggling with pollution. "It needs no research to know that the production, transportation and bursting of crackers (including those with reduced emission such as green crackers) are detrimental to the ‘mother nature’, in varying degrees and kind. Firecrackers apart from being health hazard and risk to life & limb, cause enormous environmental pollution; in dense cities like Bangalore that are plagued with ceaseless sound pollution, the bursting of crackers would only add, to the existing woes," the Court said in its judgment.The Court opined that the violation of the right to life of the youth who often get blinded while using firecrackers "would make the makers of the Constitution shiver in their graves". "Several cases are reported as to ‘ocular firecracker injuries’ in children aged 20 and below. Those who have lost their eyes, the world becomes blind to them for the rest of their lives. This would make the makers of the Constitution to shiver in their grave. There cannot be a greater violation of the right to life, limb & liberty," the Court observed..With a view to protect the health of citizens and the environment in the backdrop of accelerating climate change, the Court upheld the ban."It is in this background, the cases relating to grant, renewal, transfer, denial and rescinding of Explosive Licenses, have to be approached. Added, the alarming rate of climate change is caused due to the unsustainable and environmentally harmful patterns of life, sustainability in this regard must now more than ever before factor into decision making," the judgement stated..The Court was seized of a batch of petitions filed by retailers and wholesalers engaged in selling firecrackers across Bangalore challenging orders of the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore and the Director General and Inspector of Police, passed in 2013 imposing a blanket ban on the sale of such items in congested areas or markets in the city.The petitioners had challenged the orders claiming that their right to carry on a business as provided under Article 19 the Constitution of India would be violated by such orders..The Court, however, referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Arjun Gopal vs Union of India in which the top court had held that the right to health and environment as envisaged under Article 21 will have to be given importance over the provisions of freedom of religion Article 25."Even otherwise, in matters like this, the doctrine of equality enshrined in Article 14 cannot be readily pressed into service, unmindful of enormous hazards that would possibly put the public at large to, should a section of traders be permitted to continue their firecracker business in the areas in question. The interest of the public would be more served by petitioners and other traders shifting their said business to safer areas than being permitted to continue in the same areas in question," the judge said while dismissing the argument that vendors selling other products aren't asked to move..Justice Dixit the invoked Brihadaranyak Upanishad "Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinaha; Sarve Santu Niraamayah..""It nearly translates to: let all people be happy and all creatures be free from affliction," the judge explained, further adding that it is high time that the civil society accelerates its positive response to the "inner voice" of apex court of country against the use of firecrackers. .The Court also took note of the reasoning provided by the authorities that any fire mishap arising from the crackers and fireworks cannot be easily handled since it is difficult for fire engines to move through narrow lanes in thickly populated areas."The interest of the public would be more served by petitioners and other traders shifting their businesses to safer areas than from being permitted to continue in the same areas in question", the Court said in its judgment dismissing the petitions and upholding the ban..Senior Advocate Pramila Nesargi assisted by advocate Bindu U appeared for the petitioners.Advocates Timmanna Bhat Devathe and B V Krishna represented the state authorities..[Read Judgment]