Judicial approach towards noise pollution

Noise pollution

Noise pollution is commonly characterized as repeated exposure to high levels of sound that may have negative effects on humans or other living organisms. Sound levels less than 70 decibels (dB) are not harmful to living organisms, according to the World Health Organization, regardless of how long or coherent the exposure is.

The negative effects 

  • Every day, millions of people are affected by noise pollution. Noise Induced Hearing Loss is the most common health issue it causes (NIHL). Loud noise can also lead to high blood pressure, heart disease, sleep disruptions, and stress. These health issues can affect people of all ages, but particularly children.
  • According to the United States’ National Park Service (NPS), noise pollution has a massive      environmental impact and causes significant harm to wildlife. According to experts, noise pollution can disrupt breeding cycles and rearing, and is even hastening the extinction of some species.
  • Noise pollution can cause a variety of health problems, including stress, diminished mental acuity, and elevated blood pressure and heart rates. These issues may even lead to more serious issues. In fact, noise pollution has been linked to a variety of serious health issues, including dementia, stroke, and heart attack.

Laws preventing 

  • Noise is defined as a ‘air pollutant’ in Section 2 (a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981.

Section 2(a)

defines air pollution as any solid, liquid, or gaseous substance, including noise, present in the atmosphere at a concentration that is or may be harmful to humans, other living creatures, plants, property, or the environment.

Article 21 

Article 21 guarantees the right to a healthy environment which includes an environment without pollution. Anyone who wants to live in peace, comfort, and calm within his or her own home has the right to prohibit noise from entering as a pollutant. No one has the right to make noise, even within his own premises, that travels beyond his boundaries and causes annoyance to neighbors or others.

section 2(c) of environmental protection act 1986

Environmental pollution is defined in Section 2 (c ) of the Environment (Protection ) Act of 1986 as the presence of any environmental pollutant in the environment. According to Section 2 (b) of the said Act, an environmental pollutant is any solid, liquid, or gaseous substance present in such concentration that it is or tends to be harmful to the environment.

Sec 133 of Crpc 

Section 133: The magisterial court has been given the authority to issue orders to remove or mitigate the nuisance caused by noise pollution. Section 133 empowers an executive magistrate to intervene and remove a public nuisance with a conditional order first, and then with a permanent order. The clause may be used in the event of environmental or natural annoyance.

The noise pollution control rules 2000

Noise levels in any area/zone shall not exceed the noise-related ambient air quality standards specified in the Schedule. (2) The authority is responsible for enforcing noise pollution control measures and ensuring that ambient air quality standards for noise are met.

Sec 268-295 of IPC 

The above-mentioned sections talk about public nuisance. Noise pollution can be termed as public nuisance if the noise produced is above the decibel prescribed. According to the law of torts noise pollution is termed as a civil wrong.

Judiciary and noise pollution 

In Raghunandan Prasad5 the engine of an industrial plant was inflicting noise therefore to be a significant nuisance to the individuals living within the neighborhood and forbade the operating of engine from nine P.M. to 5 A.M.

In Mauj Raghu6 A rice mill functioning at night throughout the season won’t disentitle the inhabitants of the neighborhood to relief underneath this section if it’s established that such operating may be a nuisance.

In Ram Avtar7 The appellant carried on a trade of auctioning vegetables in a camera house. The noise caused by the auctioning caused discomfort to people living in society. AN order was passed restraining auctioning of vegetables within their house. It had been controlled by supreme court that the order wasn’t even simply as a result of the human carried on auctioning in reference to that the carts were brought; they might not be taken as reason for drawback Section 133 was not meant to stop such trades simply due to discomfort caused by the noise.

In Himmat Singh case  wherever there have been fodder talks during a residential colony to that fodder was brought daily throughout nights by trucks that were dud within the morning and fodder was cut throughout the day by electrical operated machines. it had been controlled that the carrying on the trades inflicting intolerable noises emanating offensive smells and spreading mud containing articles of fodder cut was a common nuisance as pollution.

Landmark cases 

Rabin Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal

In the above case the use of air horn was prohibited by the court to prevent noise pollution. The court observed that the illegal and necessary use of electric horn would cause grave injury to one’s health and cause excess noise pollution. 

Kirori Mal Bishambar Dayal vs The State

In the above case the court held that working of a heavy machine during the night causes grave public nuisance and was punished under section 290 of ipc. 

Appa Rao vs government of tamil nadu 

The madras high court imposed strict conditions and issue of license for the use of amplifiers and loudspeakers. 

Free legal aid cell shri sugan chand aggrawal vs government of NCT delhi 

In the above case the court held that pollution is wrongful contamination of the environment and it causes severe mental injury and affects the physical health of the person. 

Directions of the supreme court in the 2005 judgement 

In the above case to which the parties are kept undisclosed the supreme court set out certain guidelines about how the noise pollution should be controlled and what are the things which are allowed and which are the things which are not allowed which would cause excess noise pollution. This step was taken to regulate the ever increasing noise pollution. 


We have created the law regarding pollution however there’s have to be compelled to make general awareness towards the risky effects of pollution. notably, in our country the folks typically lack consciousness of the unwell effects that pollution creates and however the society as well as they themselves stand to be the beneficiary of preventing generation and emission of pollution. The place ought to be academic establishments and a lot of notable faculty. The young kids of pliant age ought to be actuated to abstain from twiddling with firecrackers, use of high sound manufacturing equipment and instruments on festivals, spiritual and social functions, family get-togethers and celebrations etc. that cause pollution. appropriate chapters are added into textbooks that teach civic sense to the youngsters and teach them the way to be sensible and accountable subjects which might embody learning by memory of assorted basic duties which would obviously embody learning to not produce pollution and to stop if generated by others. Holding of special talks and lectures is organized within the faculties to spotlight the menace of pollution and also the role of the youngsters in preventing it . For these purposes the state should pay its role by the support and cooperation of non-government organizations (NGOs) may be noncommissioned.

Dhwisha Bhatt
I am currently pursuing BBA-LLB and I am really interested in the field of law. I am an avid reader with an open mind, exploring and experimenting my creativity with every adventure life has to offer. I love dancing and playing the sitar.