The Karnataka High Court has upheld the ban imposed by the Chief Police Officer in 2013 on the sale of firecrackers in congested areas of Bengaluru. On July 29, a single judge bench of Judge Krishna S Dixit dismissed the motion filed by M/s Madhi Trading Co and others.
“You don’t have to do research to know that the production, transportation and popping of crackers (including low-emission ones like green crackers) are detrimental to ‘mother nature’, to varying degrees and types. various. Firecrackers, in addition to being a health hazard and a risk to life and physical integrity, cause enormous environmental pollution; in dense cities like Bangalore which are plagued by relentless noise pollution, cracker bursts would only add to existing woes,” the court said.
“Those who have lost their eyes, the world is blinded to them for the rest of their lives. It would make the framers of the Constitution shiver in their graves. There can be no greater violation of the right to life, to physical integrity and liberty,” the court added.
The court observed: “Unquestionably, the adverse effects of firecrackers cause irreversible damage to the environment. Besides infants, pregnant women, and patients (especially those with heart disease and high blood pressure), even animals and birds also feel the violence from cracker bursts. 14) Edit: ‘sarve bhavantu sukhinaha, sarve santu niraamayaha…’ This almost translates to: May everyone be happy and all creatures be free from affliction.
The applicants had stated that their right to engage in the activity under section 19 would be violated by the order issued by the police. The court also said that with explosive substances being “res extra commercium” (things that cannot be subject to private rights) such as alcohol, poison, etc., no citizen can claim a fundamental right unlimited under Section 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to carry on trade and business of that nature.
The judge said: ‘The public interest would be served more by petitioners and other traders moving their business to safer areas than by being allowed to continue in the same areas in question.’ The judge also noted that in the event of a fire accident resulting from firecrackers and fireworks in the narrow lanes, it would not be easy to manage and there could be a chain reaction.