The Punjab and Haryana High Court has Court reiterated and fortified the guidelines laid down in Reet Mohinder Singh Virk v. State of Punjab and Ors. while curbing the menace of noise pollution.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetrapal observed that the grievance of the noise pollution is a continuous one and will have to be monitored from micro to macro level by the concerned authorities including the executive authorities, District Magistrate and superintendent of police.
The High Court has further made the process of resolution of complaints time-bound in light of the directions passed by the Supreme Court’s judgment in Lalitha Kumari v. Government of U.P.
The petitioner filed a writ petition against the indiscriminate use of the loudspeaker at excessive and intolerable volume by a Gurudwara in the residential area.
The grievance of the Petitioners was attributed to the detriment that the ‘noise’ from the loudspeaker was causing to the health of the Petitioners as well as the other people living in the vicinity.
The bench has also granted liberty to the Petitioners to approach the jurisdictional police station and lodge an FIR in the event of any violation of the above laid down guidelines since noise pollution, being a cognizable offense, is a part of air pollution and is punishable under the penal provisions of The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981.
Further directing that If the police fails to perform its statutory under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 then the aggrieved person is free to approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C (Section 175 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
The petitioner was represented by Abhinav Sood, Mehndi Singhal, Nitesh Jhajhria, Rohit Mittal, Advocate; the State was represented by Deepak Balyan, Addl. A.G., Haryana, and Salil Sabhlok, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
