The Chief Justice of India has raised a strong question about why crackdowns on firecrackers are being enforced predominantly in Delhi, while other regions of the country continue to allow the sale and use of crackers. During a hearing on related petitions, the Chief Justice noted that Delhi often faces intense air pollution from firecrackers, particularly during festivals, but challenged why similar bans are not uniformly applied elsewhere.
The court compared Delhi with other cities and reported areas experiencing serious air quality issues yet not subject to the same regulatory restrictions. It asked whether public health concerns in those regions should prompt comparable action, rather than leaving the burden of mitigation disproportionately on Delhi’s residents.
Several petitioners arguing for a ban cited health risks and the environmental harm caused by crackers. They highlighted that inhaling smoke particles leads to respiratory problems, especially for children, the elderly, and people with lungs already compromised by pollution. The damage extends beyond human health: plants, crops, and animals also suffer when air quality deteriorates.
The Chief Justice observed that despite this, authorities in many other states have been reluctant to impose blanket bans or tight restrictions. He asked whether the uneven approach is justified, or if there should be a standardized, uniform policy across all states during known periods of high pollution risk.
In response, some state representatives insisted that local conditions, cultural practices, enforcement capacity, and economic considerations are different across regions. They argued that a one-size-fits-all rule might be difficult to implement fairly and that local governments need flexibility. They also expressed concerns about the livelihoods of those engaged in the production and sale of fireworks.
The court appeared sympathetic to the petitioners’ arguments about public health and equality. It questioned whether regional disparity in enforcement amounts to unequal protection under law. The judges pressed officials on whether constitutional duties require the government to take consistent measures to shield citizens from environmental hazards, regardless of location.
Until the matter is decided, Delhi’s existing restrictions on cracker sales and usage remain in force. Other jurisdictions may be asked to review or adjust their policies, depending on court guidance.
