Karnataka High Court
Sunada Sangeetha Kala Shale vs Assistant Commissioner on 20 April, 2018
Author: Raghvendra S.Chauhan
Bench: Raghvendra S. Chauhan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN
WRIT PETITION NOS.16406-16407/2018 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
1. Sunada Sangeetha Kala Shale,
Rajatha Kalarava Committee,
Represented by its working President
K.R. Acharya,
Advocate,
Aged about 57 years,
R.K.Building, Puttur,
Dakshina Kannada -574 209.
2. Sunada Sangeetha Kala Shale,
Represented by its Principal
Vidwan Shri Kanchan A Eshwar Bhat,
Aged about 42 years
Padila, Puttur
Dakshina Kannada -574 209.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. B.S. Sachin, Advocate)
AND:
1. Assistant Commissioner/
Electro Officer, 206
Assembly Constituency
Puttur,
Dakshina Kannada-574 201.
2
2. Circle Inspector of Police,
Puttur Police Station,
Puttur, D.K.-574 201 ...Respondents
...
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash
the impugned order dated 09.04.2018 bearing No.
20/2018 issued by R-2 at Sl.No.6 to the extent of
imposing the restriction for using loudspeaker after 10
p.m. i.e., 21.04.2018 to 22.04.2018 in the premises of
Sudana Residential School, Majalpadu, Puttur found at
Sl.No.6 of the impugned order at Annexure-A and etc.
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing, this day, the court made the following:
ORDER
With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these cases are being decided at this juncture itself.
2. The petitioners have challenged the legality of the order dated 09.04.2018, issued by the Circle Inspector Police, the respondent No.2, whereby the Circle Inspector has imposed certain conditions upon the petitioners for conducting an Indian classical music concert scheduled to be held, between 6.00 a.m on 3 21.04.2018 till 7.00 p.m on 22.04.2018, at the Sudana Residential School, Majalpadu, Puttur.
3. The petitioner No.1 is a School that teaches Carnatic classical music to its students. This school is run by Sri. Sunanda Sangeetha Kala Cultural and Charitable Trust (R). According to the petitioners, they have been running the School for the last Twenty-Five years. This year, in order to mark the Silver Jubilee of the School, the petitioners plan to hold an all night classical music concert. The programme shall last for twenty-five hours in order to mark the twenty-five years of the School. Most importantly, according to the petitioner, the concert shall take place within the banquet hall of the School. The concert will not take place in an open arena. The petitioner applied for permission for holding the said concert. However, while granting the permission on 09.04.2018, the Circle 4 Inspector has imposed certain conditions. Hence, this petition before this Court.
4. Mr.Sachin B.S., the learned counsel for the petitioners, has pleaded that the petitioners are aggrieved by two conditions namely, that the loudspeaker should not be used from 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. According to the learned counsel, it is extremely difficult to hold a classical music programme without the use of loudspeakers. Moreover, according to the learned counsel, although the impugned order refers to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, prohibiting the use of loudspeaker from 10.00 p.m to 6.00 a.m, the said prohibition is not an absolute one. Relying on the case of Church of God (Full Gospel) in India vs. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association and others (AIR 2000 SC 2773), the learned counsel has pleaded that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly made an exception with the bar that 5 the loudspeaker shall not be used at night between 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m "except in close premises for communication within, e.g., auditoria, conference rooms, community halls and banquet halls".
5. The learned counsel has also relied on the case of Balwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police and Others [(2015) 4 SCC 801], wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has relied on its previous judgment in the case of Noise Pollution (5), In re, [(2005) 5 SCC 733], in order to plead that the use of loudspeaker is permissible, provided it does not exceed 10 dB(A) above the ambient noise stands for the area, or 75 dB(A) whichever is lower. Thus, according to the learned counsel, Hon'ble Supreme Court has not denied the use of the loudspeakers completely. The Hon'ble Supreme Court does not permit the use of loudspeaker in exceptional circumstances, provided that the conditions of keeping the noise level between 10 dB(A) and 75 dB 6 (A) is strictly followed. Hence, the condition imposed by the Circle Inspector is unsustainable.
6. Secondly, the petitioner is aggrieved by the condition that it needs to seek permission from the Election Officer to use the loudspeakers and to conduct the programme. According to the learned counsel, although the election may be around the corner in the State of Karnataka, but no such permission needs to be sought from the election officer. For, the purpose of the programme is merely to showcase the talent of the students to the audience through a cultural programme. The said programme is unconnected to the ensuing election being held in the State.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State has emphasized the fact that the Government is duty bound to control the noise pollution. Since the Hon'ble Supreme court has laid down the guidelines, the said guidelines need to be followed by the State in 7 order to avoid noise pollution. Therefore, the learned counsel for the State has supported the impugned order.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
9. Undoubtedly, noise pollution is dangerous to human beings. Like air and water pollution, noise pollution needs to be controlled. While dealing with the issue of noise pollution, in the case of Noise Pollution (V) (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has prescribed certain guidelines, while dealing with the loudspeaker, as under:
1. 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.
2. No one shall beat a drum or tom-tom or blow a trumpet or beat or sound any 8 instrument or use any sound amplifier at night (between 10. 00 p.m. and 6.a.m.) except in public emergencies.
3. The peripheral noise level of privately owned sound system shall not exceed by more than 5 dB(A) than the ambient air-
quality standard specified for the area in which it is used, at the boundary of the private place.
10. Moreover, in the case of Church of God (Full Gospel) in India (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with the loudspeaker, has laid down the following guidelines:
"(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 shall not be used at night (between 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. except in closed premises for communication within, e.g. auditoria, 9 conference rooms, community halls and banquet halls."
11. A bare perusal of the guidelines established by the Hon'ble Apex Court clearly reveal that the Apex Court has not totally banned the use of loudspeaker from 10.00 p.m to 6.00 a.m. Loudspeaker can be used, provided the conditions prescribed by the Hon'ble Apex court are strictly adhered to. Moreover, the loudspeaker can be used in a closed premises for communication such as, auditorium or banquet hall. But even then, the dB (A) of the noise being produced has to be within the prescribed limit. Therefore, the Circle Inspector was not justified in prohibiting the use of the loudspeaker from 10.00 p.m., to 6.00 a.m, since the loudspeaker could be used in an banquet hall which is a closed premise. The petitioner can be permitted to use the loudspeaker provided they keep the noise pollution within the limits of 10 dB(A) to 75 dB(A). Therefore, the condition imposed by the impugned order, is modified to the 10 limited extent that the petitioner shall permit the use of loudspeaker, only within the banquet hall, between 10.00 p.m to 6.00 a.m. Moreover, the petitioner shall ensure that the noise level is kept at a comfortable level. In case, the respondents discover that the noise is above the permissible limits, they be at liberty to stop the concert, if the noise level reaches the outer limit of 75 dB(A), or to direct the petitioners to keep the noise level within the permissible limit.
12. As far as the second condition that since the elections are ensuing, the petitioners are required to seek the permission of the Election Officer for conducting cultural activity, this Court does not find any illegality in the said condition.
For the reasons stated above, the writ petitions are partly allowed.
SD/-
JUDGE Mds/-