National Green Tribunal
Suwarna Choudhary vs State Pollution Control Board Mp on 23 April, 2026
Item No.01
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)
Original Application No.66/2026(CZ)
Suwarna Choudhary Applicant(s)
Vs.
State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of Hearing: 23.04.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR CHATURVEDI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Ms. Suwarna Choudhary, in person
For Respondent(s) : None
ORDER
1. The Applicant, Ms. Suwama Choudhary, personally present and submitted that she is a permanent resident of Nyas Colony, Itarsi, District Narmadapuram, residing in the said house for over three decades along with her elderly mother aged about 67 years, who is dependent upon the Applicant for care and daily assistance.
2. The present application is necessitated due to persistent and escalating noise pollution, obstruction of residential access, and continuous public nuisance arising from commercial celebration activities being conducted in close proximity to the Applicant's residence. It is stated that a marriage garden operating under the name Vrindavan Garden, along with its office and Secondary Event Area situated approximately 300 feet from the Applicant's residence, has for several years been conducting marriage functions, DJ music (DJ trucks and Speakers), 1 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
orchestral programs, and other events extending late into night hours beyond permissible limits, causing repeated disturbance to nearby residents.
3. The situation has significantly worsened since around November 2025, when a community hall located directly opposite the Applicant's residence at a distance of approximately 15 feet, operated under Muskan Sanstha through caretaker Mr. Manish Thakur, began hosting celebration activities including DJ music, gatherings, and associated events. The extremely close proximity exposes the Applicant's residence to direct amplified sound, crowd activity, and continuous disturbance.
4. The nuisance is not limited to sound alone and regularly involves late-
night truck loading and unloading, large gatherings blocking the residential road, continuous honking, dumping of food waste, public urination in nearby areas, and loudspeaker usage under social and religious pretexts, thereby affecting sanitation, mobility, and environmental peace.
5. On multiple occasions, processions and celebration activities have been conducted immediately in front of the Applicant's residence, resulting in obstruction of the entrance gate and preventing normal ingress and egress. A particularly distressing incident occurred on 8 February 2026, when simultaneous use of drums, DJ music, and orchestral sound created extreme noise levels accompanied by road blockage due to a large gathering and parked vehicles. During the said incident, the Applicant's elderly mother experienced chest discomfort and panic, and the household was unable to effectively seek emergency assistance or exit the premises until police intervention occurred.
6. During the course of hearing, the Applicant has attended the proceedings with her mother who is facing serious problems and unable 2 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
to sleep and survive in such circumstances where loud DJ music and celebrations activities are continuing despite repeated requests and information to the authorities concerned but without any abeyance.
7. Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees life and personal liberty to all persons. Right to life enshrined in Article 21 is not of mere survival or existence. It guarantees a right of person to life with human dignity. Therein are included, all the aspects of life which go to make a person's life meaningful, complete and worth living. The human life has its charm and there is no reason why the life should not be enjoyed along with all permissible pleasures. Anyone who wishes to live in peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a right to prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him. No one can claim a right to create noise even in his own premises which would travel beyond his precincts and cause nuisance to neighbors or others. Any noise which has the effect of materially interfering with the ordinary comforts of life judged by the standard of a reasonable man is nuisance. How and when a nuisance created by noise becomes actionable has to be answered by reference to its degree and the surrounding circumstances including the place and the time. Those who make noise often take shelter behind Article 19(1)a pleading freedom of speech and right to expression.
Undoubtedly, the freedom of speech and 2 right to expression are fundamental rights but the rights are not absolute. Nobody can claim a fundamental right to create noise by amplifying the sound of his speech with the help of loudspeakers. While one has a right to speech, others have a right to listen or decline to listen. Nobody can be compelled to listen and nobody can claim that he has a right to make his voice trespass into the ears or mind of others. Nobody can indulge into aural aggression. If anyone increases his volume of speech and 3 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
that too with the assistance of artificial devices so as to compulsorily expose unwilling persons to hear a noise raised to unpleasant or obnoxious levels then the person speaking is violating the right of others to a peaceful, comfortable and pollution-free life guaranteed by Article 21. Article 19(1)a cannot be pressed into service for defeating the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21. We need not further dwell on this aspect. Two decisions in this regard delivered by High Courts have been brought to our notice wherein the right to live in an atmosphere free from noise pollution has been upheld as the one guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. These decisions are Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan Chand Aggarwal alias Bhagatji v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors., (D.B.) and P.A. Jacob v. Superintendent of Police, Kottayam. We have carefully gone through the reasoning adopted in the two decisions and the principle of law laid down therein, in particular, the exposition of Article 21 of the Constitution. We find ourselves in entire agreement therewith.
8. STATUTORY PROVISIONS Constitution of India, 1950 That Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees 'heart of fundamental rights' and is as follows: "21. Protection of life and personal liberty. --
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law."
That the Hon'ble Apex Court in In Re: Noise Pollution Implementation of the Laws for restricting use of loudspeakers and high-volume producing sound systems, (2005) 5 SCC 733, has inter alia held that Article 21 is not of mere survival and include aspects which make a person's life meaningful, complete and worth living.
4O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 That the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 provides for the protection and improvement of environment and for matters connected therewith, with the sole objective of fostering and promoting policies and decisions which relate to the protection and improvement of environment and the prevention of hazards to human beings, other living beings including flora and the property.
MANU/SC/0647/2020, went to great lengths to discuss the importance and purpose of the Act and held as follows:
"9. Later, the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 was enacted to provide for protection and improvement of environment and for matters connected therewith, with the view to implement the decision taken at the United Nations Conference on Human Environment at Stockholm in June, 1972, in which India had participated.
10. The Statement of Object and Reasons of the Environment (Protection) Act is set out herein below for convenience:
1. The world community's resolve to protect and enhance the environmental quality found expression in the decisions taken at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in June 1972.
The Government of India participated in the Conference and strongly voiced the environmental concerns. While several measures have been taken for environmental protection both before and after the Conference, the need 5 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
for a general 6 legislation further to implement the decisions of the Conference has become increasingly evident.
2. Although there are existing laws dealing directly or indirectly with several environmental matters, it is necessary to have a general legislation for environmental protection. Existing laws generally focus on specific types of pollution or on specific categories of hazardous substances. Some major areas of environmental hazards are not covered. There also exist uncovered gaps in areas of major environmental hazards. There are inadequate linkages in handling matters of industrial and environmental safety. Control mechanisms to guard against slow, insidious buildup of hazardous substances especially new chemicals in the environment, are weak. Because of a multiplicity of regulatory agencies, there is need for an authority which can assume the lead role for studying, planning and implementing long term requirements of environmental safety and to give direction to, and coordinate a system of speedy and adequate response to emergency situations threatening the environment.
9. No person in any operation or process should emit or be permitted to emit any environmental pollutant in excess or such standards as prescribed, in any form which tend to be injurious to any inter-relationship which exists among and between water, air and land, and human beings, other living creatures and such violator under 6 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
Section 7 of the Environment Protection 11 Act, 1986 is liable for imprisonment of up to 5 years and fine of up to Rs. 1,00,000.
10. As per Rule 3(2) State Pollution Control Board may provide for more stringent standards as those already made by the Central Government by the force of the Act or the Protection Rules, thus Central Act, Rules and notifications should be followed strictly and thus punishment provide under them are the minimum standards that the State Government has to follow, above and over which it can bring out more stringent punishments or rules. Thus, mandating the State Governments to follow existing Central Acts and Rules.
11. It is the obligation of the State Board to collect the data regarding noise pollution and suggest a comprehensive plan for prevention, control, and abatement of noise pollution to secure the very mandate and purpose of the Rules. The State Board has failed utterly in fulfilling its abovementioned statutory and fiduciary duties which become evident if the comparison is drawn between the State Survey of January to June 2021 [and Central Board's Survey Report on 'Status of Ambient Noise Level in India 2017' wherein through the collected data regarding noise pollution, a comprehensive plan for prevention, control and abatement of noise pollution has been sufficiently provided.
12. The present cases provide an opportunity for examining several questions, such as what is noise? What are its adverse effects? Whether noise pollution runs in conflict with the fundamental rights of the people? And what relief can be allowed by way of directions issued in public interest? The word noise is derived from the Latin term "nausea".
It has been defined as "unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication 12 dumped into the environment with regard to the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears."
7O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
13. Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Sound which pleases the listeners is music and that which causes pain and annoyance is noise.
At times, what is music for some can be noise for others.
Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, includes noise in the definition of 'air pollutant'.
2.(a) "air pollutant" means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance including noise present in the atmosphere in such concentration as may be or tend to be injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or property or environment.
According to Encyclopedia Britannica: "In acoustics 'noise' is defined as 'any undesired sound'." According to Chambers 20th Century Dictionary, 'noise' means- sound especially of loud, harsh or confused kind; a sound of any kind; an over loud or disturbing sound; frequent or public talk. In Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, the definition of noise has undergone a change. Noise pollution stands carved out as a phrase separately from noise. The two are defined as under:
"Noise - a sound; a harsh disagreeable sound, or such sound; a din. pollution - an excessive or annoying degree of noise in a particular area, e.g. from traffic or aero plane engines."
"Pollution" is a noun derived from the verb "pollute". Section 2 (c) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 defines "environmental pollution" to mean the presence in the environment of any environmental pollutant. Section 2 (b) of the said Act defines "environmental pollutant" to mean any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tends to be injurious to environment.
Thus, the disturbance produced in our environment by the undesirable sound of various kinds is called "noise pollution".
11. Noise as nuisance and health hazard.
Noise is more than just a nuisance. It constitutes a real and present danger to people's health. Day and night, at home, at work, and at play, noise can produce serious physical and psychological stress. No one is immune to this stress. Though we seem to adjust to noise by ignoring it, the ear, in fact, never 8 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
closes and the body still responds-sometimes with extreme tension, as to a strange sound in the night.
Noise is a type of atmospheric pollution. It is a shadowy public enemy whose growing menace has increased in the modern age of industrialization and technological advancement. Although a soft rhythmic sound in the form 13 of music and dance stimulates brain activities, removes boredom and fatigue, but its excessiveness may prove detrimental to living things. Researches have proved that a loud noise during peak marketing hours creates tiredness, irritation and impairs brain activities so as to reduce thinking and working abilities. Noise pollution was previously confined to a few special areas like factory or mill, but today it engulfs every nook and corner of the globe, reaching its peak in urban areas. Industries, automobiles, rail engines, aeroplanes, radios, loudspeakers, tape recorders, lottery ticket sellers, hawkers, pop singers, etc., are the main ear contaminators of the city area and its market place. The regular rattling of engines and intermittent blowing of horns emanating from the caravan of automobiles do not allow us to have any respite from irritant noise even in suburban zones.
In the modern days noise has become one of the major pollutants and it has serious effects on human health. Effects of noise depend upon sound's pitch, its frequency and time pattern and length of exposure. Noise has both auditory and non-auditory effects depending upon the intensity and the duration of the noise level. It affects sleep, hearing, communication, mental and physical health. It may even lead to the madness of people.
However, noises, which are melodious, whether natural or man-made, cannot always be considered as factors leading to pollution.
14. Noise can disturb our work, rest, sleep, and communication. It can damage our hearing and evoke other psychological, and possibly pathological reactions. However, because of complexity, variability and the interaction of noise with other environmental factors, the adverse health effects of noise do not lend themselves to a straightforward analysis.
9O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(i) Hearing Loss "Deafness, like poverty, stunts and deadens its victims."- says Helen Keller. Hearing loss can be either temporary or permanent. Noise-induced temporary threshold shift (NITTS) is a temporary loss of hearing acuity experienced after a relatively short exposure to excessive noise. Pre-exposure hearing is recovered fairly rapidly after cessation of the noise. Noise induced permanent threshold shift (NIPTS) is an irreversible loss of hearing that is caused by prolonged noise exposure. Both kinds of loss together with presbyacusis, the permanent hearing impairment that is attributable to the natural aging process, can be experienced simultaneously.
NIPTS occurs typically at high frequencies, usually with a maximum loss at around 4,000 Hz. It is now accepted that the risk of hearing loss is negligible at noise exposure levels of less than 75 dB(A) Leq (8-hr). Based on national judgments concerning acceptable risk, many countries have adopted industrial noise exposure 14 limits of 85 dB(A) ± 5 dB(A) in their regulations and recommended practices.
(ii) Interference with Communication The interference of noise with speech communication is a process in which one of two simultaneous sounds renders the other inaudible. An important aspect of communication interference in occupational situations is that the failure of workers to hear warning signals or shouts may lead to injury. In offices, schools and homes, speech interference is a major source of annoyance.
(iii) Disturbance of sleep Noise intrusion can cause difficulty in falling asleep and can awaken people who are asleep.
(iv) Annoyance Noise annoyance may be defined as a feeling of displeasure evoked by noise. The annoyance inducing capacity of a noise depends upon many of its physical characteristics and variations of these with time. However, annoyance reactions are sensitive to many non-acoustic factors of a social, psychological, or economic nature and there are considerable differences in individual reactions to the same noise.
(v) Effect on performance Noise can change the state of alertness of an individual and may increase or decrease efficiency. Performance of tasks involving motor or monotonous activities is not always degraded by noise. At the other extreme, mental activities involving vigilance, information gathering and analytical processes appear to be particularly sensitive to noise.
10O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(vi) Physiological Effects It has been determined that noise has an explicit effect on the blood vessels, especially the smaller ones known as pre- capillaries. Overall, noise makes these blood vessels narrower. Noise causes the peripheral blood vessels in the toes, fingers, skin and abdominal organs to constrict, thereby decreasing the amount of blood normally supplied to these areas. Possible clinical manifestations of stress concomitant with noise are : (i) galvanic skin response, (ii) increased activity related to ulcer formation, (iii)changes in intestinal motility, (iv)changes in skeletal muscle tension, (v) subjective response irritability perception of loudness, (vi)increased sugar, cholesterol & adrenaline, (vii)changes in heart rate, (viii)increased blood pressure, (ix) increased adrenal hormones, (x)vasoconstriction. Not only might there be harmful consequences to health during the state of alertness, but research also suggests effects may occur when the body is unaware or asleep.
The investigations have revealed that the blood vessels which feed the brain, dilate in the presence of noise. This is the reason why headaches result from listening to persistent high noise.
Field studies have also been conducted on various other groups such as people living near airports, and school children exposed to traffic noise, showing that there may be some risk for these people. In addition, laboratory studies on animals and humans have demonstrated a relationship between noise and high blood pressure. Other studies have shown that noise can induce heart attacks.
Prolonged chronic noise can also produce stomach ulcers as it may reduce the flow of gastric juice and change its acidity.
With what other stress effects can noise be associated? Stress can be manifested in any number of ways, including headaches, irritability, insomnia, digestive disorders, and psychological disorders. Workers who are exposed to excessive noise frequently complain that noise just makes them tired. Quite a few field studies have been done on workers in Europe, examining the relationship between noise and illness. In these studies, noise has been related to the following: General morbidity (illness); Neuropsychological disturbances- Headaches, Fatigue, Insomnia, Irritability, Neuroticism; Cardiovascular system disturbancesHypertension, Hypotension, cardiac disease; Digestive disorders-Ulcers, Colitis; Endocrine and biochemical disorders;
11O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(vii) Noise and the unborn There is ample evidence that environment has a role in shaping the physique, behavior and function of animals, including men, from conception and not merely from birth. The fetus is capable of perceiving sounds and responding to them by motor activity and cardiac rate change
(viii) Special effects on unborn, children and human beings generally The fetus is not fully protected from noise. Noise may threaten fetal development. Noise has been linked to low birth weights. Levels of noise which do not interfere with the perception of speech by adults may interfere significantly with the perception of speech by children as well as with the acquisition of speech, language, and language-related skills. Because they are just learning, children have more difficulty in understanding language in the presence of noise than adults do. Reading ability also may be seriously impaired by noise. Apart from children, the noise pollution causes several adverse effects on human beings generally. Some of these are: (i) hearing loss, (ii) nonauditory physiological response such as stress, arousal response, cardiovascular effects etc.,(iii) communication 16 interference, (iv) performance interference, and (v) sleep disturbance and so on.
III Sources of Noise Pollution Noise pollution like other pollutants is also a by-product of industrialization, urbanization and modern civilization.
Broadly speaking, the noise pollution has two sources, i.e. industrial and non-industrial. The industrial source includes the noise from various industries and big machines working at a very high speed and high noise intensity. Non-industrial source of noise includes the noise created by transport/vehicular traffic and the neighbourhood noise generated by various noise pollution can also be divided into the categories, namely, natural and manmade.
15. Most leading noise sources will fall into the following categories: road traffic, aircraft, railroads, construction, industry, noise in buildings, and consumer products.
(i) Road traffic noise Noise from the motors and exhaust systems of large trucks provides the major portion of highway noise impact, and provides a potential noise hazard to the driver as well. In addition, noise from the interaction of tyres with the roadway is generated by trucks, buses, and private autos. In the city, 12 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
the main sources of traffic noise are the motors and exhaust systems of autos, smaller trucks, buses, and motorcycles. This type of noise can be augmented by narrow streets and tall buildings, which produce a "canyon" in which traffic noise reverberates.
(ii) Aircraft noise Nowadays, the problem of low-flying military aircraft has added a new dimension to community annoyance, as the nation seeks to improve its "nap-of-the-earth" warfare capabilities. In addition, the issue of aircraft operations over national parks, wilderness areas, and other areas previously unaffected by aircraft noise has claimed national attention over recent years.
(iii) Noise from railroads The noise from locomotive engines, horns and whistles, and switching and shunting operations in rail yards can impact neighbouring communities and railroad workers. For example, rail car retarders can produce a high-frequency, high-level screech that can reach peak levels of 120 dB at a distance of 100 feet which translates to levels as high as 138 or 140 dB at the railroad worker's ear.
(iv) Construction noise The noise from construction of highways, city streets, and buildings is a major contributor to the urban scene. Construction noise sources include pneumatic hammers, air compressors, bulldozers, loaders, dumptrucks (and their back- up signals), and pavement breakers.
(v) Noise in industry Although industrial noise is one of the less prevalent community noise problems, neighbours of noisy manufacturing plants can be disturbed by sources such as fans, motors, and compressors mounted on the outside of buildings. Interior noise can also be transmitted to the community through open windows and doors, and even through building walls. These interior noise sources have significant impacts on industrial workers, among whom noise- induced hearing loss is unfortunately common.
(vi) Noise in buildings Apartment dwellers are often annoyed by noise in their homes, especially when the building is not well designed and constructed. In this case, internal building noise from plumbing, boilers, generators, air conditioners, and fans, can be audible and annoying. Improperly insulated walls and ceilings can reveal the sound of amplified music, voices, footfalls, and noisy activities from neighbouring units. External noise from emergency vehicles, traffic, refuse collection, and 13 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
other city noises can be a problem for urban residents, especially when windows are open or insufficiently glazed.
(vii) Noise from consumer products Certain household equipment, such as vacuum cleaners and some kitchen appliances have been and continue to be noisemakers, although their contribution to the daily noise dose is usually not very large.
16. Notification No. G.S.R. 682(E) dated 05-10-1999 whereby the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 framed under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 were amended. Amended Rule 89 of the said Rules, reads as follows:
"89. Noise standards for fire- crackers A
(i) The manufacture, sale or use of firecrackers generating noise level exceeding 125 dB(AI) or 145 dB(C)pk at 4 meters distance from the point of bursting shall be prohibited.
(ii) For individual fire-cracker constituting the series (joined fire-crackers), the above mentioned limit be 27 reduced by 5 log10 (N) dB, where N = number of crackers joined together." (2) The use of fireworks or fire-crackers shall not be permitted except between 6.00 a.m. and 10.00p.m. No firework or firecracker shall be allowed between 10.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m.
(iii)Firecrackers shall not be used at any time in silence zones, as defined in S.O. 1046(E) issued on 22.11.2000 by the Ministry of Environment and Forests. In the said Notification Silence Zone has been defined as: "Silence Zone is an area comprising not less than 100 meters around hospitals, educational institutions, courts, religious places or any other area which is declared as such by the competent authority."
(iv) The State Education Resource Centers in all the States and the Union Territories as well as the management/principals of schools in all the States and Union Territories shall take appropriate steps to educate students about the ill effects of air and noise pollution and appraise them of directions (1) to (3) above."
17. Increasing noise levels in the urban areas, is posing a serious threat to health of the people in general and especially to the children and old, in 14 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors. particular. It is also an admitted fact that automobiles, due to its engine (auto mechanism) noise and also, noise generated by blowing of horns contribute significantly to ambient noise levels in urban areas. Needless to say, that various reports available in the public domain, record that ambient noise levels in most of urban areas in the country are exceeding the ambient noise level standards as set out in the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. Noise pollution is a significant environmental problem in many urban areas. This problem has not been adequately addressed and remedied despite the fact that it is growing in developing countries. This widespread non- recognition of noise pollution problem, in a similar fashion as to air and water pollution problems, could be attributed to reasons such as; by the definition and perception of noise as a subjective experience, short decay time, and difficulty to associate cause with effect when it comes to health impacts. Depending on its duration and volume, the effects of noise on human health and comfort are divided into four categories; physical effects, such as hearing defects; physiological effects, such as increased blood pressure, irregularity of heart rhythms and ulcers; psychological effects, such as 28 disorders, sleeplessness and going to sleep late, irritability and stress; and finally, effects on work performance, such as reduction ofproductivity and misunderstanding what is heard.
18. The Motor vehicle rule 120 prescribes the noise standards for automobiles at manufacturing stage and are as under:
"120. (2) Noise standards--Every motor vehicle shall be constructed and maintained so as to conform to noise standards specified in Part E of the Schedule VI to the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, when tested as per IS:
3028-1998, as amended from time to time. Similarly, Section 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, stipulate the requirement that prototype every motor vehicle to be subjected to test. The Rule is reproduced below:
126. Prototype of every motor vehicle to be subject to test--- On and from the date of 'Commencement' of Central Motor Vehicles 15 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(Amendment) Rules 1993, every [manufacturer or importer] of motor vehicles other than trailers and semi- trailers shall submit the prototype of the vehicle [to be manufactured or imported by him] for test by the Vehicle Research and Development Establishment of the Ministry of Defence of the Government of India or Automotive Research Association of India, Pune, [or the, Central Farm Machinery Testing and Training Institute, Budni (MP)] or the Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehradun, [or the Central Institute of Road Transport, Pune, or the International Centre, for Automotive Technology. Manesar,] [or the Northern. Region Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Hisartesting of combine harvester)] and such other agencies as may be specified by the Central Government or granting a certificate by that agency as to the compliance of provisions of the Act and these rules:
[Provided that the procedure for type approval and certification of motor vehicles of compliance to these rules shall be in accordance with the AIS; 017-2000, as amended from time to time:] [Provided further that in respect to the vehicles imported into India as completely built units (CBU), the importer shall submit a vehicle of that particular model and type to the testing agencies for granting a certificate by that agency as to the compliance to the provision of the Act and these rules.] [126A. The testing agencies referred to in rule 126 shall in accordance with the procedures laid down by the Central Government also conduct tests on vehicles drawn from the production line of the manufacturer to verify whether these vehicles conform to the provisions of [rules made under section 110 of the Act]:] [Provided that in case the number of 29 vehicles sold in India for a given base model and its variants (manufactured in India or imported to India) are less than 250 in any consecutive period of six months in a year, then such base model and its variants need not be subjected to the above test, if at least one model or its variants manufactured or imported by that manufacturer or importer, as the case may be, is subjected to such tests at least once in a year:
Provided further that, in case the number of base models and its variants manufactured/imported is more than one and if the individual base model and its variants are less than 250 in any consecutive period of six months in a year, then the testing agencies can pick up one of the vehicles out of such models and their variants once in a year for carrying out such test.]"
19. There is a need for creating general awareness towards the hazardous effects of noise pollution. Suitable chapters may be added in the text- books which teach civic sense to the children and youth at the initial/early level of education. Special talks and lectures be organised in the schools to highlight 16 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors. the menace of noise pollution and the role of the children and younger generation in preventing it. Police and civic administration should be trained to understand the various methods to curb the problem and also the laws on the subject.
The State must play an active role in this process. Residents Welfare Associations, Service Clubs and Societies engaged in preventing noise pollution as a part of their projects need to be encouraged and actively involved by the local administration. Special public awareness campaigns in anticipation of festivals, events and ceremonial occasions whereat firecrackers are likely to be used, need to be carried out."
20. The matter was previously raised before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13029 of 1985 dated 24.08.2018 and Hon'ble Apex Court dealt with the matter as follows:
16. It is an established principle of law that the right to life, as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to a decent environment. It includes within its ambit the right 30 of a citizen to live in a clean environment. With regard to vehicular traffic, this Court has issued a number of directions to ensure a clean environment and reduce pollution. It has been held that the right to clean environment is a fundamental right. The right to live in an environment free from smoke and pollution follows from the "quality" of life which is an inherent part of Article 21 of the Constitution. The right to live with human dignity becomes illusory in the absence of a healthy environment. The right to life not only means leading a life with dignity but includes within its ambit the right to lead a healthy, robust life in a clean atmosphere free from pollution. Obviously, such rights are not absolute and have to co-
exist with sustainable development. Therefore, if there is a conflict between health and wealth, obviously, health will have to be given precedence. When we are concerned with the health of not one citizen but the entire citizenry including the future citizens of the country, the larger public interest has to outweigh the much smaller pecuniary interest of the industry, in this case the automobile industry, especially when the entire wherewithal to introduce the cleaner technology exists."
21. CPCB has issued certain guidelines and rules are framed with regard to the noise pollution. The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 provides as follows:
17O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
"(The Principal Rules were published in the Gazette of India, vide S.O. 123(E), dated 14.2.2000 and subsequently amended vide S.O. 1046(E), dated 22.11.2000, S.O. 1088(E), dated 11.10.2002, S.O. 1569 (E), dated 19.09.2006 and S.O. 50 (E) dated 11.01.2010 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.) Whereas the increasing ambient noise levels in public places from various sources, inter-alia, industrial activity, construction activity, fire crackers, sound producing instruments, generator sets, loud speakers, public address systems, music systems, vehicular horns and other mechanical devices have deleterious effects on human health and the psychological wellbeing of the people; it is considered necessary to regulate and control noise producing and generating sources with the objective of maintaining the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise. The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 provides Ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for different areas/zones as under.
-a. The ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for different areas / zones shall be such as specified in the Schedule annexed to these rules.
b. The State Government shall categorize the areas into industrial, commercial, residential or silence areas / zones for the purpose of implementation of noise standards for different areas. c. The State Government shall take measures for abatement of noise including noise emanating from vehicular movements, blowing of horns, bursting of sound emitting firecrackers, use of loud speakers or public address system and sound producing instruments and ensure that the existing noise levels do not exceed the ambient air quality standards specified under these rules. d. All development authorities, local bodies and other concerned authorities while planning developmental activity or carrying out functions relating to town and country planning shall take into consideration all aspects of noise pollution as a parameter of quality of life to avoid noise menace and to achieve the objective of maintaining the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise. e. An area comprising not less than 100 metres around hospitals, educational institutions and courts may be declared as silence area / zone for the purpose of these rules.
4. Responsibility as to enforcement of noise pollution control measures:
(1)The noise levels in any area / zone shall not exceed the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise as specified in the Schedule.18
O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(2)The authority shall be responsible for the enforcement of noise pollution control measures and the due compliance of the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise.
(3)The respective State Pollution Control Boards or Pollution Control Committees in consultation with the Central Pollution Control Board shall collect, compile and publish technical and statistical data relating to noise pollution and measures devised for its effective prevention, control and abatement.
5. Restrictions on the use of loud speakers / publicaddress system and sound producing instruments.-
(1) A loud speaker or a public address system or any sound producing instrument or a musical 32 instrument or a sound amplifier shall not be used at night time except in closed premises for communication within, like auditoria, conference rooms, community halls, banquet halls or duringa public emergency. (2) Notwithstanding any thing contained in sub-rule (2), theState Government may subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loud speakers or public address system and the like during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural or religious festive occasion of a limited duration not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year. The concerned State Government shall generally specify in advance, the number and particulars of the days on which such exemption would be operative. (3) The noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker or public address system or any other noise source is being used shall not exceed 10 dB (A) above the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB (A) whichever is lower; (4) The peripheral noise level of a privately owned sound system or a sound producing instrument shall not, at the boundary of the private place, exceed by more than 5 dB (A) the ambient noise standards specified for the area in which it is used.
5A. Restrictions on the use of horns, sound emitting construction equipment's and bursting of fire crackers:-
(1) No horn shall be used in silence zones or during night time in residential areas except during a public emergency. (2) Sound emitting fire crackers shall not be burst in silence zone or during night time. (3) Sound emitting construction equipment's shall not be used or operated during night time in residential areas and silence zones.
6. Consequences of any violation in silence zone / area.- Whoever, in any place covered under the silence zone / area commits any of the following offence, he shall be liable for penalty under the provisions of the Act:-
(i) whoever, plays any music or uses any sound amplifiers, 33 19 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(ii) whoever, beats a drum or tom-tom or blows a horn either musical or pressure, or trumpet or beats or sounds any instrument, or
(iii) whoever, exhibits any mimetic, musical or other performances of a nature to attract crowds
(iv) whoever, bursts sound emitting fire crackers; or
(v) whoever, uses a loud speaker or a public address system.
7. Complaints to be made to the authority. -
(1) A person may, if the noise level exceeds the ambient noise standards by 10 dB (A) or more given in the corresponding columns against any area / zone or, if there is a violation of any provision of these rules regarding restrictions imposed during night time, make acomplaint to the authority.
(2) The authority shall act on the complaint and take action against the violator in accordance with the provisions of these rules and any other law in force.
8 Power to prohibit etc. continuance of music sound or noise.
-
(1) If the authority is satisfied from the report of an officer incharge of a police station or other information received by him including from the complainant that it is necessary to do so in order to prevent annoyance, disturbance, discomfort or injury or risk of annoyance, disturbance, discomfort or injury to the public or to any person who dwell or occupy property on the vicinity, he may, by a written order issue such directions as he may consider necessary to any person for preventing, prohibiting, controlling or regulating:-
(a) the incidence or continuance in or upon any premises of-
(i) any vocal or instrumental music,
(ii) sounds caused by playing, beating, clashing, blowing or use in any manner whatsoever of any instrument including loudspeakers, public address systems, horn, construction equipment, appliance or apparatus or contrivance which is capable of producing or re- producing sound, or
(iii) sound caused by bursting of sound emitting fire crackers, or,
(b) the carrying on in or upon, any premises of any trade, avocation or operation or process resulting in or attended with noise. (2) The authority empowered under sub-rule (1) may,either on its own motion, or on the application of any person aggrieved by an order made under sub-rule (1), either rescind, modify or alter any such order:
Provided that before any such application is disposed of, the said authority shall afford to the applicant and to the original complainant, as the case may be, an opportunity of appearing before it either in person or by a person representing him and showing cause against the order and shall, if it rejects any such 20 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
application either wholly or in part, record its reasons for such rejection."
22. In light of above guidelines issued by the CPCB and the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, the authorities are legally bound to follow the guidelines and parameters as laid down by the CPCB and the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.
23. In the case of P.I.L. No. 570 of 2020, Afzal Ansari And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others decided on 15.05.2020, the Court dealt with the matter and distinguished the freedom of conscience and its limitation as follows:
It will be relevant to quote Article 25 as well as Article 19 (1)(2)
25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion (1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely toprofess, practise and propagate religion (2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law
(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;
(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus Explanation I The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.
19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech,etc.--
(1) All citizens shall have the right--
(a)to freedom of speech and expression;
(b)to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) to form associations or unions 2 [or co-operative societies];
(d)to move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e)to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;[and] * * *** 21 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation,trade or business.
(2) Nothing in sub-clause
(a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
17. In this regard it may be noted that the issue of the use of sound amplifying devices for amplifying human voice and other sounds while offering daily pujas by a Hindu Organization arose before the Calcutta High Court in the case of Om Birangana Religious Society Vs. The State and Ors., MANU/WB/0254/1996, wherein it was held as under:
15. It is well-settled that the right to propagate one's religion means the right to communicate a person's belief to another or to expose the tenets of that faith. The question is whether the right to propagate religion includes the right to use loudspeakers and microphones for the purpose of chanting religious tenets or religious texts and/or the indiscriminate use of microphones or loudspeakers during religious performance in the society.
17. There cannot be any dispute that sound is a known source of pollution. The adverse and ill effect of sound on human body is also known. It has a tremendous impact on the nervous system of human being ....
20. The religion that has been performed by the petitioner andothers, is nothing new, but the same is there for several centuries. It cannot be said that the religious teachers or the spiritual leaders who had laid down these tenets, had any way desired the use of microphones as a means ofperformance of religion. Undoubtedly, one can practise, profess and propagate religion, as guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution, but that is not an absolute right. The provisions of Article 25 is subject to the provisions of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. On true and proper construction of the provisions of Article 25(1), read with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, it cannot be said that a citizen should be coerced to hear anything which he does not like or which he does not require.
19. The Apex Court in the case of Church of God (Full Gospel) in India Vs. K.K.R. Majestic reported in (2000) 7 SCC 282 has held as follows: "no religion or religious sect can claim that the use of loudspeakers or similar instruments for prayers or for worship or 22 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
for celebrating religious festivals is an essential part of the religion which is protected under Article 25. We hold that there is no fundamental right to use loud-speakers or similar instruments under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. On the contrary, the use of such instruments contrary to the Noise Pollution Rules will be a violation of fundamental rights of citizens under Article 21 of the Constitution as well as fundamental right of citizens of not being forced to listen something which they do not desire to listen
20. In the case of P.A. Jacob v. Supdt. of Police, AIR 1993 Ker 1, it was held that right to speech implies the right to silence. It implies freedom, not to listen, and not to be forced to listen. The right comprehends freedom to be free from what one desires to be free from. A person cannot be forced to hear what, he wishes not, to hear. That will be an invasion of his right to be let alone, to hear what he wants to hear, or not to hear, what he does not wish to hear.
22. The apex court while dealing with the issue of privacy as part of Article 21 of Constitution of India held that right to sleep has always been treated to be a fundamental right like right to breath, to eat, to drink, to blink, etc. In the case of Ramlila Maidan Incident, in re, reported in 2012 (5) SCC 1 in paragraphs 318 and 327, the apex court held as follows:
318. Thus, it is evident that right of privacy and the right to sleep have always been treated to be a fundamental right like a right to breathe, to eat, to drink, to blink, etc.
327. An individual is entitled to sleep as comfortably and as freely as he breathes. Sleep is essential for a human being to maintain the delicate balance of health necessary for its very existence and survival. Sleep is, therefore, a fundamental and basic requirement without which the existence of life itself would be in peril. To disturb sleep, therefore, would amount to torture which is now accepted as a violation of human right. It would be similar to a third degree method which at times is sought to be justified as a necessary police action to extract the truth out of an accused involved in heinous and cold- blooded crimes. It is also a device adopted during warfare where prisoners of war and those involved in espionage are subjected to treatments depriving them of normal sleep.
23. There is catena of judicial decisions which recognizes the right to live in freedom from noise pollution as a fundamental right protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Noise pollution beyond permissible limit is hazardous which violates the fundamental rights of citizens.
23O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
24. In the case of Church of God (Supra), the Supreme Court has held that 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 or beating of drums. In a civilized society in the name of religion, activities which disturb old or infirm persons, students or children having their sleep in the early hours or during daytime or other persons carrying on other activities cannot be permitted. A student preparing for his examination is entitled to concentrate on his studies without their being any unnecessary disturbance by the neighbours. Similarly, the old and the infirm are entitled to enjoy reasonable quietness during their leisure hours without there being any nuisance of noise pollution. Aged, sick, people afflicted with psychic disturbances as well as children up to 6 years of age are considered to be very sensitive to noise. Their rights are also required to be honoured.
26. It cannot be denied that sound is one of the recognised mode of creating pollution and thus sound pollution by means of using loud-speakers, without prior permission of authority, as prescribed in law, has to be controlled. A citizen has a right to leisure, right to sleep, right not to hear and right to remain silent. He has also the right to read and speak with others. Use of microphones certainly takes away the right of the citizens to speak with others, their right to read or think or the right to sleep. There may be heart patients or patients suffering from nervous disorder and they may be compelled to bear this serious impact of sound pollution which has had an adverse effect on them. It may create health problems.
27. No person has right to take away the right of others. There is no religious freedom in this country except the provisions of Art. 25 of the Constitution which is subject to public order, morality and health and other provisions of part III including Art. 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Freedom of religion is subject to others' right as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, namely, religious freedom cannot abridge or take away or suspend others' right under Article 19(1)(a) regarding their freedom of speech and expression. Use of loud-speakers is not an integral part of Azan or necessary for making Azan effective. Use of loud-speakers otherwise in accordance with law affects fundamental rights of the citizens under Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India. No one has got the right to make other persons captive listeners. One cannot disturb others' basic human rights and fundamental rights. Use of loud-speakers can cause hearing loss, disturbance of sleep, interference with communication, annoyance etc. and other diseases. Right to sleep is not only a fundamental right but it is to be conceded to be a basic human right.
24O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
29. At this juncture, it would be worthwhile to refer to Rule 4, 5, 5A and Section 6 of the Noise Pollution Rules as follows;
4. Responsibility as to enforcement of noise pollution control measures.
(1) The noise levels in any area/zone shall not exceed the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise as specified in the Schedule.
(2) The authority shall be responsible for the enforcement of noise pollution control measures and the due compliance of the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise.
(3) The respective State Pollution Control Boards or Pollution Control Committees in consultation with the Central Pollution Control Board shall collect, compile and publish technical and statistical data relating to noise pollution and measures devised for its effective prevention, control and abatement.
5. Restrictions on the use of loud speakers/public address system (and sound producing instruments).
(1) A loud speaker or a public address system shall not be used except after obtaining written permission from the authority.
(2) A loud speaker or a public address system or any sound producing instrument or a musical instrument or a sound amplifier shall not be used at night time except in closed premises for communication within, like auditoria, conference rooms, community halls or during a public emergency.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (2), the State Government may subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loud speakers or public address systems and the like during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural, religious or festive occasion of a limited duration not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year and the concerned State Government or District Authority in respect of its jurisdiction as authorized by the concerned State Government shall generally specify in advance, the number and particulars of the days on which such exemption should be operative.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-rule, the expressions-
25O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
(i) "festive occasion" shall include any National function or State function as notified by the Central Government or State Government; and
(ii) "National function or State function" shall include"-
(A) Republic Day;
(B) Independence Day;
(C) State Day; or (D) such other day as notified by the Central Government or the State Government.15 (4) The noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker or public address system or any other noise source is being used shall not exceed 10 dB (A) above the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB (A) whichever is lower;
(5) The peripheral noise level of a privately owned sound system or a sound producing instrument shall not, at the boundary of the private place, exceed by more than 5dB (A) the ambient noise standards specified for the area on which it is used.] 5A. Restrictions on the use of horns, sound emitting construction equipments and bursting of fire crackers.
(1) No horn shall be used in silence zones or during night time in residential areas except during a public emergency.
(2)Sound emitting fire crackers shall not be burst in silence zone or during night time.
(3) Sound emitting construction equipments shall not be used or operated during night time in residential areas and silence zones.
6. Consequences of any violation in silence zone/area. Whoever, in any place covered under the silence zone/area commits any of the following offence, he shall be liable for penalty under the provisions of the Act:
(i) whoever, plays any music or uses any sound amplifiers,
(ii) whoever, beats a drum or tom-tom or blows a horn either musical or pressure, or trumpet or beats or sounds any instrument, or
(iii) whoever, exhibits any mimetic, musical or other performances of a nature to attract crowds.
(iv) whoever, bursts sound emitting fire crackers; or
(v) whoever, uses a loud speaker or a public address system.26
O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
30. Rule 5 deals with not only use of loudspeakers/public address system but it also deals with sound producing instruments or a musical instrument or a sound amplifier. Under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5, it is provided that a loud-speaker or a public address system shall not be used except after obtaining written permission from the Authority under the Noise Pollution Rules. Sub-rule (2) provides that a loudspeaker or a public address system or any sound producing instrument or a musical instrument or a sound amplifier shall not be used at night time except in closed premises such as auditorium, conference halls, banquet halls, community halls or during a public emergency. The Schedule under the Rules of 2000, defines night time to mean the period between 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. Day time is defined as 6.00 am to 10.00 pm. Thus, even if permission is granted under Sub-rule (1) of Rule (5) to use loudspeakers or public address systems, the same cannot be used between 10.00 pm till 6.00 a.m. Then comes Sub-rule (3) which confers 44 power of relaxation on the State Government. It confers power on the State to permit the use of loudspeakers or public address system and the like during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural or religious festive occasion not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year. The said SubRule requires the concerned State Government to specify in advance, the number and particulars of the days on which such exemption would be operative. Sub-rule (3) is an exception carved out which permits the State Government to relax the prohibition under Sub-rule (3) for a period of 15 days in a calender year by permitting use of loudspeakers/public address systems or the like only between 10 pm to 12 midnight.
31. The challenge to Sub-rule (3) was negated by the Apex Court in the case of Noise Pollution (VII) Vs. Union of India and Ors. (2005) 8 SCC 796. In paragraph 8 of the said decision the Apex Court held thus:-
8. Looking at the diversity of cultures and religions in India, we think that a limited power of exemption from the operation of the Noise Rules granted by the Central Government in exercise of its statutory power cannot be held to be unreasonable. The power to grant exemption is conferred on the State Government. It cannot be further delegated. The power shall be exercised by reference to the State as a unit and not by reference to districts, so as to specify different dates for different districts. It can be reasonably expected that the State Government would exercise the power with due care and caution and in the public interest. However, we make it clear that the scope of the exemption cannot be widened either by increasing the number of days or by increasing the duration beyond two hours. If that is attempted to be done, then the said Sub-rule (3) conferring power to grant exemption may be liable to be struck down as violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
We also make it clear that the State Government should generally 27 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
specify in advance, the number and particulars of the days on which such exemption will be operative. Such specification would exclude arbitrariness in the exercise of power. The exemption, when granted, shall not apply to silence zone areas. This is only as a clarification as this even otherwise is the position of law.
32. Thus, under no circumstances loudspeakers or any public address system or musical system or sound amplifiers can be permitted to be 45 used between 12.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. As according to Noise Pollution Rules, night hours have been fixed between 10. p.m. to 6 a.m. For the period between 10pm to 12 midnight the power of relaxation has been conferred only upon the State Government under Sub Rule 3 of Rule 5.
37. xxxx In this regard emphasis has been laid on Paragraphs 9 & 10 of the guidelines contained in order No. 40-3/2020-D dated 24.03.2020, issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India for containing Covid-19 pandemic in the country, which are as follows: "(9) All places of worship shall be closed for public. No religious congregations will be permitted, without any exception. (10)All social /political/ sports/ entertainment/ academic/ cultural/ religious .functions/ gathering shall be barred."
24. A substantial issue of environment has been raised.
25. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.
26. Respondents are directed to submit their reply within six weeks through E-filing portal, preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
27. Applicant is directed to take necessary steps for service to the respondents by both ways and also on available email.
28. We deem it just and proper to call a report on the matter in issue in present Original Application, from a Joint Committee consisting of: -
i. One representative from the MoEF&CC, Regional Office, Bhopal ii. One representative nominated by the Director CPCB, Regional Office, Bhopal, and 28 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.
iii.One representative nominated by the Member Secretary, State Pollution Control Bhopal, M.P.
29. The Committee is directed to visit the place and submit the factual and action taken report within four weeks. The State PCB will be the nodal agency for coordination and logistic support.
30. Applicant is directed to supply the copy of the application and relevant documents to the Committee and Respondent(s) within a week and after compliance of service, the applicant has to submit an affidavit that the notice and copy of the application have been served upon the Committee and respondent(s).
31. The report in the matter be filed by the Committee through email at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
List the matter on 9th July 2026.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM Sudhir Kumar Chaturvedi, EM 23rd April, 2026, Original Application No.66/2026(CZ) A 29 O.A. No.66/2026(CZ) Suwarna Choudhary Vs. State Pollution Control Board MP & Ors.