Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition

NA

Advocates
  • Mr. Harpreet Singh Hora, Mr. Amit K. Sharma, Ms. Manpreet Kaur and Mr. Satyam Singh, Advs.
  • Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Abhishek Bhati and Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Advs. for R-1 and 6
  • Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC (Civil)-GNCTD/R-2 and 3
  • Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Adv. for R-4/CPCB
  • Mr. Biraja Mahapatra and Mr. Sumit Mishra, Advs. for R-5/DPCC
  • SI Ram Tirath, Pairvi Officer (Traffic)
Judges
  • D.N. Patel, C.J.
  • C. Hari Shankar, J.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition

NA

Advocates
  • Mr. Harpreet Singh Hora, Mr. Amit K. Sharma, Ms. Manpreet Kaur and Mr. Satyam Singh, Advs.
  • Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Abhishek Bhati and Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Advs. for R-1 and 6
  • Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC (Civil)-GNCTD/R-2 and 3
  • Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Adv. for R-4/CPCB
  • Mr. Biraja Mahapatra and Mr. Sumit Mishra, Advs. for R-5/DPCC
  • SI Ram Tirath, Pairvi Officer (Traffic)
Judges
  • D.N. Patel, C.J.
  • C. Hari Shankar, J.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

This Public Interest Litigation was filed by the petitioners seeking a ban on the manufacture, sale, purchase, and use of hazardous pressure horns, multi-toned horns, speakers/woofers, modified silencers on Enfield make bikes, and other loud sound-producing equipment fitted in vehicles operating unregulated in the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. The petitioners' grievance centered on the use of such equipment, particularly in designated silence zones, which they contended should have been controlled by the respondents. The respondents filed status reports indicating prosecutions against motorists for using pressure horns and modified silencers, and compliance with earlier court directions. The writ petition and related interim application were ultimately disposed of by the Court.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the manufacture and sale of hazardous pressure horns, multi-toned horns, speakers/woofers, modified silencers, and other loud sound-producing equipment fitted in vehicles plying unregulated in the NCT of Delhi should be banned.
  2. Whether the purchase and use of such hazardous sound-producing equipment on vehicles should be banned in the NCT of Delhi.
  3. Whether any other orders are necessary for effective regulation and redressal of grievances concerning noise pollution from vehicles in Delhi.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioners' Arguments

  • The petitioners sought a ban on the manufacture, sale, purchase, and use of hazardous pressure horns, multi-toned horns, speakers/woofers, modified silencers on Enfield bikes, and other loud sound-producing equipment in vehicles operating without regulation in Delhi.
  • They highlighted the problem of noise pollution caused by such equipment, especially in silence zones.

Respondents' Arguments

  • Respondent No.3 submitted status reports detailing enforcement action taken, including prosecution of thousands of motorists for use of pressure horns and modified silencers.
  • Respondent No.3 also referred to a circular issued on 3rd June 2019 seeking action taken reports in compliance with directions from a prior judgment dated 26th March 2007.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court noted the petitioners' main grievance regarding the use of pressure horns and modified silencers in silence zones and observed that the respondents had already initiated enforcement actions as reflected in the status reports. The first status report indicated prosecution of 6315 motorists for pressure horn use and 53 for modified silencers between 4th June and 22nd July 2019. The second status report, covering 23rd July to 8th October 2019, showed prosecutions of 6157 motorists for pressure horns and 390 for modified silencers. The Court took note of the circular issued by Respondent No.3 to ensure compliance with an earlier judgment. Given these measures and ongoing enforcement, the Court found no reason to continue monitoring the case and directed the respondents to persist with lawful actions to address the grievances raised.

Holding and Implications

The writ petition was disposed of with the observation that the respondents shall continue enforcement actions as per their status reports and in accordance with the law. The related interim application was also disposed of in view of the writ petition's disposal. No new precedent was set; the decision primarily reflected the Court's satisfaction with the respondents' ongoing compliance efforts and enforcement measures regarding noise pollution from vehicles in Delhi.

Show full summary ...
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Justice For Rights Foundation And Another v. Union Of India And Others

    $~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI th

    Date of decision: 17 October, 2019

    + W.P.(C) 9358/2018 and CM No. 36273/2018

    JUSTICE FOR RIGHTS FOUNDATION AND ANR.

    ..... Petitioners

    Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh Hora, Mr. Amit K. Sharma, Ms. Manpreet Kaur and Mr. Satyam Singh, Advs.

    versus

    UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents

    Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Abhishek Bhati and Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Advs. for R-1 and 6

    Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC(Civil)- GNCTD/R-2 and 3

    Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Adv. for R- 4/CPCB

    Mr. Biraja Mahapatra and

    Mr. Sumit Mishra, Advs. for R-5/DPCC SI Ram Tirath, Pairvi Officer (Traffic)

    CORAM:

    HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR

    O R D E R

    % 17.10.2019

    D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)

    W.P.(C) 9358/2018

    1. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following prayers :

    1

    "1. Ban the manufacture and sale of hazardous pressure horns, multi-toned horns, speakers/woofers, modified silencers on Enfield make bikes and other loud sound producing equipment fitted in vehicles plying unregulated in NCT of Delhi.

    2. Ban the purchase and use of hazardous pressure horns, multi-toned horns, speakers/woofers, modified silencers on Enfield make bikes and other loud sound producing equipment fitted in vehicles plying unregulated in NCT of Delhi.

    3. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble court-may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."

    2. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking at the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the main grievance ventilated in this petition is about the use of the pressure horns and modified silencers by the vehicle owners/occupiers and that too in a silence zone which ought to have been taken care of by the respondents.

    3. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.3 who submits that detailed status report was initially filed by the Respondent No.3 in the month of July, 2019 and thereafter another status report has been filed on 16thOctober, 2019.

    4. In view of these status reports, it appears that initially for the period between from 4thJune, 2019 and 22ndJuly, 2019, 6315 motorists have been prosecuted for using pressure horns and 53 vehicle owners/occupiers have been prosecuted for using modified silencers.

    2

    5. Similarly, it further appears from the second status report dated 16th October, 2019 that for the period between 23rdJuly, 2019 and 8thOctober, 2019, as many as 6157 motorists have been prosecuted for using pressure horns and 390 motorists have been prosecuted for using modified silencers. Status report dated 16thOctober, 2019 is taken on record, copy thereof has also been given to counsel for the petitioner.

    6. Moreover, it further appears from the status report filed in the month of July, 2019, a circular dated 3rdJune, 2019 (Annexure A to the status report) is also issued by the Respondent No.3 and they are seeking action taken report in the format mentioned in the said circular in compliance with the directions passed by this Court vide judgment dated 26thMarch, 2007 in W.P.(C) 16565/2006 from the concerned supporting officers.

    7. Thus in view of the aforesaid actions initiated by the respondents and looking at both the status reports, we see no reason to further monitor this case. Suffice it to say that the respondents shall continue taking actions as per their earlier status reports in accordance with law for redressal of grievances ventilated in this Public Interest Litigation.

    8. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.

    CM No. 36273/2018 (stay)

    1. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, this application also stands disposed of.

    CHIEF JUSTICE

    C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

    OCTOBER 17, 2019/kr

    3

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.
    Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

    Comments

    Justice For Rights Foundation And Another v. Union Of India And Others
    (Oct 17, 2019)