Noise Pollution and The legislation
NOISE POLLUTION AND LAW FOR IT
BY Adv. Sandigdha Mishra
advsandigdha@paydirtprofessionals.com
Noise, loud music, irritating sounds etc. are not a recent problem. It has a long history. Two thousand five hundred year ago, the ancient Greek colony of syber knew of measures to check noise. They had rules to protect sleep and provide a quit and peaceful life to citizens. Loud sounds wew prohibited by Julius Caesar who also banned movements of noisy chariots at night.
In China, noise was a form of execution for those who insulted the heavenly powers. Guilty persons were subjected to the sounds of fluids, drums and shouts of persons continuously day and night until they died.
Noise is a type of atmospheric pollution in the form of waves. It is a shadowy public enemy. It has increased in the modern age of industrialisation and technological advancement.
Pollution being the most dangerous problem likes cancer in which death is sure but slow. Environment pollution is assuming dangerous proportions all through the globe and India is not free from this poisonous disease. This is the gift of modern living, industrialization and urbanization. Unless timely action is taken we have a forbid and bleak future for the world.
The word noise is derived from the Latin term nausea. It has been defined as unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication dumped into the environment with regard to the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears.
1. Constitution of India-
The Factories Act does not contain any specific provision for noise control. However, unde the Third Schedule Sections 89 and 90 of the Act, noise induced hearing loss, is mentioned as notifiable disease. Similarly, under the Modal Rules, limits for noise exposure for work zone area have been prescribed.
Further for better regulation for noise pollution There are The Noise Pollution ( Regulation and Control ) Rules, 2000 – in order to curb the growing problem of noise pollution the government of India has enacted the noise pollution rules 2000 that includes the following main provisions:-
# The state government may categories the areas in the industrial or commercial or residential
# The ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for different areas have been specified.
Latest authority of supreme court is a land mark judgment in the field of noise pollution
In Re: Noise Pollution11 Following important observations have been made by Supreme court regarding noise pollution which are discussed as follows:-
Facts of the case:
Anil mittal an engineer filed this case . the immediate reason for this was that a 13 years old girl was a victim of rape he cries for held and went unheard due to blaring sound of loudspeakers noise music over loud speakers in the neighbor hood. the Petitioner complain of noise created by the use of loudspeakers being used in religious performances or singing bhajans and the like in busy commercial hi fi audio systems are used.
There are rules framed by the government regarding noise pollution and known as Noise Pollution control and Regulation Rules, 1999. On 11-10-2002 govt brought in an amendment in the rules. The amendment empowered the state government to permit use of loudspeakers or public address system during night hours between 10 pm to 12 pm in the mid night on or during the cultural or religious occasions for a limited period not exceeding 15 days.
In this case supreme observed that Right to life enshrined in Article 21 is not of mere survival or existence. It guarantees a right of persons to life with human dignity. There in are included all the aspects of life which go to make a person life meaningful complete and worth living. Every body who wished to live in peace , comfort and quiet with in his house has a right to prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him. No one claim a right to noise to create noise even in his own premises which would travel beyond his precincts and cause nuisance to neighbors or others.
The word noise is derived from the Latin term nausea. It has been defined as unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication dumped into the environment with regard to the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears.
Noise- a sound; a harsh disagreeable sound, or such sound; a din. Pollution- an excessive or annoying degree of noise in a particular area, e.g. from traffic or aero plane engines.
Noise is defined as unwanted sound
Sound, which pleases the listeners, is music and that which causes pain and annoyance is noise. At times, what is music for some can be noise for others2
Section 2 (a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 includes noise in the definition of ‘air pollutant’.
Section 2(a) air pollution means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance including noise present in the atmosphere such concentration as may be or tent to injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or property or environment
Noise can be described as sound without agreeable musical quality or as an unwanted or undesired sound. Thus noise can be taken as a group of laud, non harmonious sounds or vibrations that are unpleasant and irritating to ear.
Noise is defined as unwanted sound
Sound, which pleases the listeners, is music and that which causes pain and annoyance is noise. At times, what is music for some can be noise for others2Section 2 (a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 includes noise in the definition of ‘air pollutant’.
Section 2(a) air pollution means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance including noise present in the atmosphere such concentration as may be or tent to injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or property or environment
Pollution is a noise derived from the verb pollute. Section 2 (c ) of the Environment (Protection ) Act, 1986 defines environmental pollution to mean the presence in the environment of any environmental pollutant. Section 2 (b) of the said Act defines environmental pollutant to means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be ,or tends to be injurious to environment.
Indian legislation on Noise Pollution-
1. Constitution of India-
Right to Life:- Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees life and personal liberty to all persons. It is well settled by repeated pronouncements of the Supreme Court that right to life enshrined in Article 21 is not of mere survival or existence. It guarantees a right of persons to life with human dignity. Any one who wishes to live in peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a right to prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him.
Right to Information:- Every one has the right to information know about the norms and conditions on which Govt. permit the industry which effect the environment.
Right to Information:- Every one has the right to information know about the norms and conditions on which Govt. permit the industry which effect the environment.
2. Right to Religion and Noise-
Right to religion does not include right to perform religious activities on loud speaker and electronic goods which produce high velocity of noise.
Directive Principal of State Policy:
The state has the object to make the enviorment pollution free.
Fundamental Duties:
every citizen of the country has the fundamental duty to clean the environment.
3. Cr.P.C. Section 133
Here Section 133 is of great importance. Under Crpc. Section 133 the magisterial court have been empowered to issue order to remove or abate nuisance caused by noise pollution Sec 133 empower an executive magistrate to interfere and remove a public nuisance in the first instance with a conditional order and then with a permanent one. The provision can be utilized in case of nuisance of environment nature. He can adopt immediate measure to prevent danger or injury of a serious land to the public. For prevention of danger to human life, health or safety the magistrate can direct a person to abstain from certain acts.
4. I.P.C. Public Nuisance 268-295
Chapter IV of Indian Penal code deals with offences relating to public health, safety, ....decency , morals under Sections 268, 269, 270, 279, 280, 287, 288, 290 291 294. Noise pollution can be penalized with the help of above section. Private remedies suits in the area may related to public nuisance under A299. This article punishment in case of Public nuisance law of torts covers. A person is guilty of public nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger, or annoyance to the pubic or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right. A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage. Who ever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this code, shall be punished with fine, which may extend to Rs. 200.
5. Law of Torts Noise pollution is considered as civil wrong:-
Directive Principal of State Policy:
The state has the object to make the enviorment pollution free.
Fundamental Duties:
every citizen of the country has the fundamental duty to clean the environment.
3. Cr.P.C. Section 133
Here Section 133 is of great importance. Under Crpc. Section 133 the magisterial court have been empowered to issue order to remove or abate nuisance caused by noise pollution Sec 133 empower an executive magistrate to interfere and remove a public nuisance in the first instance with a conditional order and then with a permanent one. The provision can be utilized in case of nuisance of environment nature. He can adopt immediate measure to prevent danger or injury of a serious land to the public. For prevention of danger to human life, health or safety the magistrate can direct a person to abstain from certain acts.
4. I.P.C. Public Nuisance 268-295
Chapter IV of Indian Penal code deals with offences relating to public health, safety, ....decency , morals under Sections 268, 269, 270, 279, 280, 287, 288, 290 291 294. Noise pollution can be penalized with the help of above section. Private remedies suits in the area may related to public nuisance under A299. This article punishment in case of Public nuisance law of torts covers. A person is guilty of public nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger, or annoyance to the pubic or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right. A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage. Who ever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this code, shall be punished with fine, which may extend to Rs. 200.
5. Law of Torts Noise pollution is considered as civil wrong:-
Under law of torts , a civil suit can be filed claiming damages for the nuisance. For filing a suit under law of torts a plaintiff is required to comply with some of the requirement of tort of nuisance which are as follows:-
1. There should be reasonable interference.
2. Interference should be with the use & enjoyment of land.
3. In an action for nuisance actual damage is required to be proved. As a general rule either the presence or absence of malice does not matter. But in some cases deviation from the rule has been made.
In Christe Vs Davey The extent of noise & the amount of disturbance caused there by was ignored & it was held that the noise which arose due to the practice of lawful profession, & without any malice, could not be considered to be actionable nuisance.
In Hollywood Silver Fox Farm Ltd. Vs Emmett It was held that presence of malice was a factor in determining liability for noise amounting to nuisance. The court said that even on his won land was nuisance, & the defendant was liable in damage.
1. There should be reasonable interference.
2. Interference should be with the use & enjoyment of land.
3. In an action for nuisance actual damage is required to be proved. As a general rule either the presence or absence of malice does not matter. But in some cases deviation from the rule has been made.
In Christe Vs Davey The extent of noise & the amount of disturbance caused there by was ignored & it was held that the noise which arose due to the practice of lawful profession, & without any malice, could not be considered to be actionable nuisance.
In Hollywood Silver Fox Farm Ltd. Vs Emmett It was held that presence of malice was a factor in determining liability for noise amounting to nuisance. The court said that even on his won land was nuisance, & the defendant was liable in damage.
5. Factories Act Reduction of Noise and Oil of Machinery-
The Factories Act does not contain any specific provision for noise control. However, unde the Third Schedule Sections 89 and 90 of the Act, noise induced hearing loss, is mentioned as notifiable disease. Similarly, under the Modal Rules, limits for noise exposure for work zone area have been prescribed.
6. Motor Vehicle Act.-
Provision Relation to use of horn and change of Engine:- In Motor veichle Act rules regarding use horns and any modification in engine are made.
7. Noise Pollution Control Rule 2000 under Environment Protection Act 1996 :-
Provision Relation to use of horn and change of Engine:- In Motor veichle Act rules regarding use horns and any modification in engine are made.
7. Noise Pollution Control Rule 2000 under Environment Protection Act 1996 :-
Further for better regulation for noise pollution There are The Noise Pollution ( Regulation and Control ) Rules, 2000 – in order to curb the growing problem of noise pollution the government of India has enacted the noise pollution rules 2000 that includes the following main provisions:-
# The state government may categories the areas in the industrial or commercial or residential
# The ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for different areas have been specified.
State government shall take measure for abatement of noise including noise emanating from vehicular movement and ensure that the existing noise levels do not exceed the ambient air quality standards specified under these rules.
# An area not less than 100 m around hospitals educations institutions and court may be declare as silence are for the purpose of these rules.
# A loud speaker or a public address system shall not be used except after obtaining written permission from the authority and the same shall not be used at night. Between 10 pm to 6 am
# A person found violating the provisions as to the maximum noise permissible in any particular area shall be liable to be punished for it as per the provision of these rules and any other law in force.
In Mauj Raghu6 A rice mill working at night during season will not disentitle the inhabitants of locality to relief under this section if it is established that such working is a nuisance.
In Ram Avtar7 The appellant carried on a trade of auctioning vegetable in private house the noise caused by the auctioning caused discomfort to person living in society. An order was passed restraining auctioning g of vegetable in the their house. It was held by supreme court that the order was not justified merely because the applicant carried on auctioning gin connection with which the carts were brought they could not be taken as cause of problem Section 133 was held not intended to stoop such trades merely because of discomfort caused by the noise.
In Himmat Singh8 Where there were fodder tals in a residential colony to which fodder was brought daily during nights by trucks which were unloaded in the morning and fodder was cut during the day by electric operated machines. It was held that the carrying on the trades causing intolerable noises emanating offensive smells and spreading dust containing articles of fodder cut was public nuisance as noise pollution.
Some other important cases are also have great relevance in this regard:
In Govind singh9 the court examined the emerging parameters of public nuisance. The supreme court on special leave to appeal noted that the evidence disclosed the emission of smoke injurious to health and physical comfort of people living or working in the proximity of appellant bakery and held this as a case of public nuisance.
In Maulan Mufti Syed and Other V. State of West Bengal AIR 1999 CAL 15 The court held imposition of restriction on the use of microphone and loud speakers by the state government between 9 pm to 7 am which inter alia include recitation of azan on microphone in early hours before 7 AM is not violative of Article 25 of constitution guaranteeing
# An area not less than 100 m around hospitals educations institutions and court may be declare as silence are for the purpose of these rules.
# A loud speaker or a public address system shall not be used except after obtaining written permission from the authority and the same shall not be used at night. Between 10 pm to 6 am
# A person found violating the provisions as to the maximum noise permissible in any particular area shall be liable to be punished for it as per the provision of these rules and any other law in force.
Judiciary And Noise Pollution
In Raghunandan Prasad5 the engine of a factory was causing noise so as to be a serious nuisance to be the people living in the neighborhood the forbade the working of engine from 9 P.M. to 5 A.M.In Mauj Raghu6 A rice mill working at night during season will not disentitle the inhabitants of locality to relief under this section if it is established that such working is a nuisance.
In Ram Avtar7 The appellant carried on a trade of auctioning vegetable in private house the noise caused by the auctioning caused discomfort to person living in society. An order was passed restraining auctioning g of vegetable in the their house. It was held by supreme court that the order was not justified merely because the applicant carried on auctioning gin connection with which the carts were brought they could not be taken as cause of problem Section 133 was held not intended to stoop such trades merely because of discomfort caused by the noise.
In Himmat Singh8 Where there were fodder tals in a residential colony to which fodder was brought daily during nights by trucks which were unloaded in the morning and fodder was cut during the day by electric operated machines. It was held that the carrying on the trades causing intolerable noises emanating offensive smells and spreading dust containing articles of fodder cut was public nuisance as noise pollution.
Some other important cases are also have great relevance in this regard:
In Govind singh9 the court examined the emerging parameters of public nuisance. The supreme court on special leave to appeal noted that the evidence disclosed the emission of smoke injurious to health and physical comfort of people living or working in the proximity of appellant bakery and held this as a case of public nuisance.
In Maulan Mufti Syed and Other V. State of West Bengal AIR 1999 CAL 15 The court held imposition of restriction on the use of microphone and loud speakers by the state government between 9 pm to 7 am which inter alia include recitation of azan on microphone in early hours before 7 AM is not violative of Article 25 of constitution guaranteeing
Latest authority of supreme court is a land mark judgment in the field of noise pollution
In Re: Noise Pollution11 Following important observations have been made by Supreme court regarding noise pollution which are discussed as follows:-
Facts of the case:
Anil mittal an engineer filed this case . the immediate reason for this was that a 13 years old girl was a victim of rape he cries for held and went unheard due to blaring sound of loudspeakers noise music over loud speakers in the neighbor hood. the Petitioner complain of noise created by the use of loudspeakers being used in religious performances or singing bhajans and the like in busy commercial hi fi audio systems are used.
There are rules framed by the government regarding noise pollution and known as Noise Pollution control and Regulation Rules, 1999. On 11-10-2002 govt brought in an amendment in the rules. The amendment empowered the state government to permit use of loudspeakers or public address system during night hours between 10 pm to 12 pm in the mid night on or during the cultural or religious occasions for a limited period not exceeding 15 days.
In this case supreme observed that Right to life enshrined in Article 21 is not of mere survival or existence. It guarantees a right of persons to life with human dignity. There in are included all the aspects of life which go to make a person life meaningful complete and worth living. Every body who wished to live in peace , comfort and quiet with in his house has a right to prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him. No one claim a right to noise to create noise even in his own premises which would travel beyond his precincts and cause nuisance to neighbors or others.
Conclusion:-
We have made the law relating to noise pollution but there is need to creating general awareness towards the hazardous effects of noise pollution. Particularly, in our country the people generally lack consciousness of the ill effects which noise pollution creates ad how the society including they themselves stand to beneficiary preventing generation and emission of noise pollution. The target area should be educational institutions and more particularly school. The young children of impressionable age should be motivated to desist from playing with firecrackers, use of high sound producing equipments and instruments on festivals, religious and social functions, family get-togethers and celebrations etc. which cause noise pollution. Suitable chapters can be added into textbooks, which teach civic sense to the children and teach them how to be good and responsible citizen which would include learning by heart of various fundamental duties and that would obliviously include learning not to create noise pollution and to prevent if generated by others. Holding of special talks and lectures can be organized in the schools to highlight the menance of noise pollution and the role of the children in preventing it. For these purpose the state must pay its role by the support and cooperation of non-government organizations (NGOs) can also be enlisted.
We have made the law relating to noise pollution but there is need to creating general awareness towards the hazardous effects of noise pollution. Particularly, in our country the people generally lack consciousness of the ill effects which noise pollution creates ad how the society including they themselves stand to beneficiary preventing generation and emission of noise pollution. The target area should be educational institutions and more particularly school. The young children of impressionable age should be motivated to desist from playing with firecrackers, use of high sound producing equipments and instruments on festivals, religious and social functions, family get-togethers and celebrations etc. which cause noise pollution. Suitable chapters can be added into textbooks, which teach civic sense to the children and teach them how to be good and responsible citizen which would include learning by heart of various fundamental duties and that would obliviously include learning not to create noise pollution and to prevent if generated by others. Holding of special talks and lectures can be organized in the schools to highlight the menance of noise pollution and the role of the children in preventing it. For these purpose the state must pay its role by the support and cooperation of non-government organizations (NGOs) can also be enlisted.
Comments
Post a Comment