Supreme Court Refuses Permission For Firecrackers With Barium And Also Joined Crackers
The Supreme Court today rejected two applications whereby the Firecracker manufacturers sought permission to manufacture firecrackers with new improved formulations with barium plus additives, and joined firecrackers (series crackers or laris). The Court while reserving the judgment in the matter had directed the Delhi Police not to issue temporary licenses for sale and storage of any kind of firecrackers, saying that it would be difficult to segregate a green from a non-green firecracker.
A bench of Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh while refusing to allow the two applications said that the 2018 regulations are being reiterated. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan appeared for the original petitioners and Senior Advocate Shyam Divan appeared for one of the applicants, the manufacturers of firecrackers.
The plea was originally filed in 2015, on behalf of three infants, the petitioners before the Apex Court, who sought a blanket ban on the sale and use of firecrackers in the National Capital Region (NCR) citing deteriorating air quality. Pursuant to which, the Apex Court passed several interim orders in the matter.
In the 2018 judgment of the Court, a bench of Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan while banning barium salts in the fireworks, also banned the manufacture, sale and use of joined firecrackers (series crackers or laris) as the same causes huge air, noise and solid waste problems.
The crackers that were allowed were:
-Use of Reduced Emission firecrackers (Improved crackers) - (a) Avoidance of use of ash as desiccant or filler materials in crackers for reduction in particulate mater by 15-20%. These can be implemented subject to approval by PESO, and (b) usage of charcoal meeting specifications of explosives and pyrotechnics as prescribed by PESO.
-Use of Reduced Emission firecrackers (Green crackers): Safe water and air sprinklers (SWAS) - Low emission sound and light emitting functional crackers with PM reduction by 30-35% and significant reduction in NOx and SO2 due to in-situ water generation as dust suppressant and low cost due to usage of low cost oxidants. These can be implemented subject to approval by PESO.
However, the bench even clarified in the 2018 judgment that “Our discussion pertaining to the arguments based on Article 19(1)(g), Article 25 as well as the argument of loss of substantial revenue and unemployment, in cases the manufacture and sale of the firecrackers is totally banned, is prima facie and we have not given our conclusive determination. It is because of want of detailed studies on various aspects which have been mentioned and taken note of during discussion in this order. However, we also make it clear that, prima facie, we do not find much merit in these arguments for which we have given our reasons in brief”.
In a 2021 order, the Court had noted that considering the matter pertained to public interest and that it affects the health of innocent citizens including senior citizens and children, it is the duty of all the States to ensure implementation of the Court’s directions. While clarifying that there is no total ban on use of firecrackers, the bench in the order noted, “No authority can be permitted the violation of the directions issued by this Court and permit banned firecrackers under the guise of celebration. Celebration cannot be at the cost of the other’s health. Under the guise of 9celebration, nobody can be permitted to infringe the right to health of the others, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and nobody can be permitted to play with the life of the others, more particularly the senior citizens and the children”.
In the 2021 order, it was further noted that any lapse on the part of the State Governments or Agencies and Union Territories will be viewed very seriously. In case of a breach, the Chief Secretary of the concerned State(s), the Secretary (Homes) of the concerned State(s) and the Commissioner of Police of the concerned area, District Superintendent of Police of the concerned area and the SHO/Police Officer in-charge of the concerned police station shall be held personally liable.
An application had been filed in 2021 to bring on record the tests done by ‘Awaaz Foundation’ alleging that the banned firecrackers are being manufactured, used and sold though they are specifically banned by the Apex Court, It further alleged that ‘green crackers’ are being sold in the market by fireworks manufacturers containing chemicals that have been banned by this Court and not only that but even the fake QR codes are printed on the boxes and mislabelling them as ‘green crackers’.
Cause Title: Arjun Gopal & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.
