)626 , 2001 (Suppl. ) ACC 279 , 2000 (5 )ALT22 (SC ), 2001 (2 )BLJR806 , IV (2000 )CCR35 (SC ), 2000 CriLJ4022 , 2001 GLH(1 )293 , 2000 INSC 424 , JT2000 (9 )SC 575 , 2000 (3 )KLT651 (SC ), 2001 -1 -LW(Crl)233 , 2000 (4 )RCR(Civil)312 , 2000 (4 )RCR(Criminal)225 , 2000 (6 )SCALE163 , (2000 )7 SCC282 , [2000 ]Supp3 SCR15 , 2000 (2 )UJ1496 , ,MANU/SC/0537/2000M.B. Shah#S.N. Phukan#2101SC2100Judgment/OrderACR#AIR#ALD(Cri)#Allahabad Criminal Cases#ALT#BLJR#CCR#CriLJ#GLH#INSC#JT#KLT#LW(Criminal)#MANU#RCR (Civil)#RCR (Criminal)#SCALE#SCC#SCR(Supp)#UJM.B. Shah,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2013-12-20Non auditory effects,Noise Pollution - Legal and Medico Legal Aspect,Legal topics,Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion,Right to Freedom of Religion,Fundamental Rights,Constitution of India,Medical Jurisprudence8938,9224,16925,16926,16916 -->

MANU/SC/0537/2000

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 732 of 2000 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2686 of 1999)

Decided On: 30.08.2000

Appellants: Church of God (Full Gospel) in India Vs. Respondent: K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M.B. Shah and S.N. Phukan

JUDGMENT

M.B. Shah, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The questions involved in this appeal are that in a country having multiple religions and numerous communities or sects, whether a particular community or sect of that community can claim right to add to noise pollution on the ground of religion? Whether beating of drums or reciting of prayers by use of microphones and loudspeakers so as to disturb the peace or tranquillity of neighbourhood should be permitted? Undisputedly 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 our view, in a civilized society in the name of religion, activities which disturbed old or infirm persons, students or children having their sleep in the early hours or during day-time or other persons carrying on other activities cannot be permitted. It should not be forgotten that young babies in the neighbourhood are also entitled to enjoy their natural right of sleeping in a peaceful atmosphere. A student preparing for his examination is entitled to concentrate on his studies without their being any unnecessary disturbance by the neighbours. Similarly, old and inform 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 upto 6 years of age are considered to be very sensible to noise. Their rights are also required to be honoured.

3. Under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, rules for noise pollution level are framed which prescribe permissible limits of noise in residential, commercial, industrial areas or silence zone. The question is - whether the appellant can be permitted to violate the said provisions and add to the noise pollution? In our view, to claim such a right itself . would be unjustifiable. In these days, the problem of noise pollution has become more serious with the increasing trend towards industrialization, urbanization and modernization and is having many evil effects including danger to the health. It may cause interru........