Loud DJ Music Near School, Class-II Student’s Death: Allahabad HC Orders Fresh Suo Motu PIL On Noise Pollution

The Allahabad High Court on September 28, 2026 directed registration of a fresh suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to examine the growing problem of noise pollution and compliance with statutory restrictions, after taking note of the death of a Class-II student who allegedly collapsed in her classroom following loud music played during a procession near her school.

A division bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Manjive Shukla, while hearing a pending PIL titled Noise Pollution Thru Modified Silencers Suo Moto v. State of U.P. and Others, observed that noise pollution had become a “menace” despite the existence of statutory provisions under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.

Court, however, made it clear that it had not drawn any conclusion regarding the cause of the child’s death.

The incident

The incident took place on September 22, 2026, when the girl was attending a class at Divine Public School on City Palace Road, Bhagautiganj, Balrampur. According to the material placed before the court, loudspeakers and a music system were being played at a high volume during a procession passing near the school. The child allegedly collapsed in her classroom immediately thereafter and subsequently died.

The incident was brought before the high court when the matter concerning misuse of pressure horns, modified silencers and hooters was mentioned urgently by the court-appointed amicus curiae, Senior Advocate Gaurav Mehrotra.

The bench said the incident raised broader questions concerning noise pollution and its impact on citizens. Since the issue would involve several government departments and authorities, court considered it appropriate to register a separate suo motu PIL rather than deal with the matter within the existing proceedings.

What will the new PIL examine?

Court said the proceedings would examine “Noise Pollution and compliance of statutory provisions” by the concerned authorities.

It questioned who was responsible for curbing noise pollution and what measures were being taken to enforce the statutory framework. The bench noted that violations of the 2000 Rules were frequently seen on streets despite the issue having already been recognised by Parliament and the rule-making authorities.

Court also said that if existing measures were insufficient to control the problem, a mechanism involving regular monitoring of compliance would need to be considered.

The bench further highlighted the need for greater public awareness, observing that lack of awareness was one of the main reasons behind violations of the statutory provisions.

Government departments and authorities made parties

Court directed that several senior government officials and agencies be arrayed as opposite parties in the fresh proceedings. These include the state departments of Home, Transport, Forest and Environment, Housing and Urban Planning and Urban Development, besides the Director General of Police, Lucknow Police Commissioner, Lucknow District Magistrate, Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow Municipal Corporation, Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board and Central Pollution Control Board.

With regard to the Balrampur incident, court directed that the District Magistrate, Superintendent of Police and Chief Medical Officer of Balrampur, as well as the Divine Public School through its headmaster, be made parties.

The state's Additional Chief Standing Counsel was directed to obtain instructions and reports from the Balrampur District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police. A copy of the order is also to be served on the school so that it can assist the court regarding the incident.

Court said those arrayed as parties may file affidavits concerning the incident, measures already taken, steps proposed to be taken and suggestions for effective implementation of the 1986 Act and the 2000 Rules.

It also said that if people continued to violate the statutory provisions despite measures being taken, they would have to be made accountable. Court noted that the Rules provide for penalties which can be imposed under the 1986 Act.

At the same time, the bench expressed concern that the parents of the deceased child and school authorities should not be pressured or that the school's functioning should not be unnecessarily interfered with by any person or state authority.

The fresh suo motu PIL has been directed to be listed on October 12, 2026, while the pending PIL, Writ Public Interest Litigation No. 15385 of 2021, Noise Pollution Thru Modified Silencers Suo Moto v. State of U.P. and Others, concerning the misuse of pressure horns, modified silencers and hooters, will continue to be heard on October 9.

Case Title: Noise Pollution Thru Modified Silencers Suo Moto v. State of U.P. and Others

Order date: September 28, 2026

Bench: Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla