SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. GADKARI, SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
Jaago Nehru Nagar Residents Welfare Association – Petitioner
Versus
The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai – Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 4729 of 2021
Decided On : 23-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Kaushik Mhatre, Chinmay Jawale, Reena Rechards
For the Respondents: J.P. Yagnik, Sachindra B. Shetye

There is no fundamental right to use loudspeakers for religious purposes. Noise pollution violates the right to life, and authorities are mandatorily required to enforce noise standards, monitor cumulative sound levels, and take strict action against violators regardless of the nature of the premises.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 19(1)(a), 21, 25, 26 - Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 - Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Sections 38, 70, 136, 149 - Noise pollution from religious structures - Use of loudspeakers - Fundamental rights vs. public order and health - No religion prescribes that prayers should be performed by disturbing the peace of others nor does it preach that they should be through voice-amplifiers - Right to life includes the right to live in peace and quiet - No fundamental right to use loudspeakers or similar instruments - Use of loudspeakers is not an essential part of any religion. (Paras 10, 11, 15.1, 18, 22)

(B) Police Duty - Enforcement of noise standards - Cumulative noise levels - Police are bound to take action under the relevant police act on every default or breach committed by the user of sound-emitting gadgets - Cumulative sound level of all gadgets in use at one point of time must be within prescribed limits - Police must act on complaints without disclosing the identity of the complainant to the offender. (Paras 23, 24, 25.2, 29)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, an association of residents, filed a petition seeking directions to authorities to register complaints and take action against the use of loudspeakers at high volumes in religious structures located in residential areas. The petitioners alleged that the noise levels exceeded permissible limits, causing health issues and disturbing the peace, and that the police failed to take action despite multiple complaints.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the right to live in an atmosphere free from noise pollution is guaranteed under the right to life. Religious practices do not grant a fundamental right to use loudspeakers. The police are duty-bound to enforce noise pollution rules, monitor cumulative sound levels, and take strict measures including cautioning offenders, imposing fines, and seizing equipment upon repeated violations.

Issues: The main issues were whether religious places have a fundamental right to use loudspeakers, whether police are obligated to enforce noise pollution standards, and how cumulative noise levels should be regulated in residential areas.

Ratio Decidendi: Noise pollution constitutes a violation of the right to life. Since no religion mandates the use of loudspeakers for prayers, such activities cannot infringe upon the rights of others to a peaceful environment. Authorities must ensure strict compliance with noise standards and take proactive measures to prevent public nuisance.

Result: Petition partly allowed.

Table of Content
1. factual background involving noise pollution complaints in residential areas. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. police responses and the procedural handling of noise pollution reports. (Para 4 , 5)
3. contentions regarding the implementation of existing noise pollution rules. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. legal precedents confirming noise pollution control as a fundamental right and duty. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
5. directives mandating strict adherence to noise control measures and standard operating procedures. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)

JUDGMENT :

A.S. GADKARI, J.

1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for (i) appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 to register F.I.R. against the offenders for using loudspeakers in high volume without permission, violating the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 [for short, “Noise Pollution Rules”] and the provisions in the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 [for short, “said Act”] and the other relevant laws thereof; (ii) for directing the Respondent No. 1-Commissioner of Police, Mumbai to take appropriate action against the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 for failure in discharging their official duty and defying and non implementing and/or non complying with the Orders dated 10th November 2012 and 16th August 2016 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 173 of 2010; and for other consequential reliefs.

2. Heard Mr. Mhatre, learned counsel for Petitioners, Mr. Yagnik, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 6-State and Mr. Shetye, learned counsel for Respondent No. 7-M.P.C.B.

3. Petitioners are the associations registered with the concerned Authorities having their object to do development work for the locality, with the aim to improve the general welfare and quality of life of the citizens, to help the residents in the locality in solving the problems and issues being faced by them. Petitioners are suffering from the noise pollution being created by the concerned violators by using loudspeakers in high volume without legal permission from the Authorities and also due to the casual approach and inaction on the part of the Police Department, ignoring the Rules and law of the land and in carrying out their duties. The Petitioners have therefore been constrained to institute present Petition for enforcing their fundamental and legal rights as the residents living in the area stated in the Petition since the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 have failed to protect their fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India to its citizens.

3.1 It is the case of the Petitioners that, the peace and tranquility in their locality are being constantly disturbed through the use of microphones and loudspeakers to recite ‘Azaan’ and other religious discourses by the offenders on a daily basis. That, there are many masjids and madrasas situated within the jurisdiction of Chunabhatti and Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East) Police Stations. The said masjids have fixed with/placed loudspeakers, microphones and/or amplifiers and the sound created therefrom is unbearable as the decibel level of the said sound is not only excessive but beyond the permissible decibel limits under the law. That, the said loudspeakers are being used in the early morning hours i.e. as early as 5:00 a.m. as well as till the midnight and many a times even past midnight. The loudspeakers are being used five times a day for the purpose of Azaan (call for prayer regularly). That, use of loudspeakers in the early hours i.e. at about 5:00 a.m. in the morning are “prohibited hours” under the law and during the festival days, they are operated till 1:30 a.m., which is beyond permissible limit for its use, even if the permission is alleged to have been granted by the concerned Authorities.

3.2 That, there are many masjids in the locality of Nehru Nagar and Chunabhatti area. For example, the Pet

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top