'It's Making the Lord Deaf’: Justice Nariman Calls for Ban on Early-Morning Loudspeakers, Temple Bell Ringing

Former Supreme Court judge Justice Rohinton Nariman has called for a nationwide curb on early-morning loudspeaker announcements and temple bell ringing, cautioning that such religious practices pose a grave risk to public health.

Justice Nariman, while delivering the KM Bashir Memorial Lecture at Thiruvananthapuram on September 1, stated that religious expressions in the form of loudspeakers and temple bell ringing create noise pollution, which is directly linked to citizens’ right to health, and it must be stopped. 

He said, "I find today that every faith seems to get louder in its protestations and is making the Lord deaf. I find today either a person is screaming into a microphone from a mosque or another is banging temple bells. All this must stop. Because this creates noise pollution and if it creates noise pollution, it is covered by the restriction of health (on the fundamental right to practice one's religion), primarily and straightaway. Every state should, at the earliest, first ban loudspeakers and temple bell ringing, etc., which disturbs people and their sleep early in the morning. It is something that the state must take into its hands and do it down the board, so that one cannot say that it is favouring X or Y. You stop it completely". 

He added that while loudspeakers may be used within enclosed spaces such as an auditorium, like the one where he was delivering his address, their use in open areas causes public nuisance and should not be permitted.

In his address on the topic "Fraternity in a secular state: The protection of cultural rights and duties", he pointed to Article 25, which guarantees freedom of conscience and religion, noting that this freedom has limits when it comes to public order, morality, health, secular regulation, and social welfare. Noise pollution falls under the health ground in these limits, he clarified. 

Justice Nariman situated his remarks within the constitutional framework of equality and religious freedom. He reminded that Article 17 abolished untouchability and made its practice a crime, binding every citizen to treat others equally. Citing Article 25, he highlighted that “all persons are equally entitled” to freedom of conscience and religion, stressing that the principle of equality lies at the heart of this guarantee.

Expanding on its scope, he explained that the right to freedom of religion covers three elements: to practice, to profess, and to propagate. “Every one of us practices religion at home, in a mosque, a church, or a temple. But we are given another right, the right to profess, which includes external expressions of our faith. The Constitution explicitly says the carrying of a kirpan by a Sikh is part of that right. Similarly, turbans, tikas, and other religious objects worn on the person are protected as fundamental rights,” he said.

On propagation, Justice Nariman recalled that the term was included at the insistence of K.M. Munshi, who argued that it was fundamental to the Christian community to be able to convert. However, he criticized the Supreme Court’s 1977 ruling in Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, which held that propagation does not include the right to convert, but only to express one’s faith. This, he said, has led to a “skew” in current legislation, where even voluntary conversions through persuasion are being penalized. According to him, this interpretation should be revisited by the apex court.

These remarks were made by him during his lecture on “Fraternity in a Secular State: The Protection of Cultural Rights and Duties".