Justice Oka: No Faith Allows Firecrackers or Loudspeakers; Judges Must Lead in Protecting Nature

Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S. Oka has underscored that no religion allows pollution or environmental degradation, urging that the judiciary must lead by example in protecting the planet and upholding citizens right to live in a clean environment.

Speaking at a lecture organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association titled “Clean Air, Climate Justice and We - Together for a Sustainable Future,” Justice Oka made an earnest call for collective awareness and action against pollution being carried out in the name of religion.

“The most crucial reason for our failure to protect the environment is the failure of both citizens and the State to perform their fundamental duty under Article 51A of the Constitution,” Justice Oka said. He noted that every religion teaches compassion for all living beings, yet pollution has come to be justified under the garb of religious celebration. “No religion permits us to destroy the environment or cause cruelty to animals while celebrating festivals,” he added.

Referring to the widespread use of firecrackers, Justice Oka drew attention to how the practice transcends all faiths. “I will give example of firecracker bursting in Diwali; it is not confined to Diwali or Hindu festivals alone. Many parts of India have seen on the first day of Christian New Year, firecrackers being burst. They are used in marriages of people belonging to practically all religions. Can anyone say that bursting of firecrackers is an essential part of any religion which is protected under our Constitution?” he asked.

He questioned the meaning of joy derived from activities that harm others, observing that festivals are meant for happiness and togetherness, not suffering. “When we celebrate festivals, we do it for joy and happiness, when families come together, they exchange gifts and sweets. But how is there joy and happiness by bursting crackers which cause irritation to the old and infirm and to birds and animals?” he remarked. According to him, the answer to whether such acts are protected under Article 25 must be “firmly in the negative.”

Justice Oka also addressed the pollution caused by idol immersions and ritual bathing in rivers. “Please visit the beaches after the visarjan of Ganpati idols,” he said. “You can see with your own eyes what kind of damage we cause by immersion of the idols. It is not confined only to Ganpati visarjan. Other religious fests are held on the beaches and lakes.” He recalled that even some judicial orders had inadvertently permitted environmentally harmful practices, such as allowing large plaster of Paris idols contrary to pollution control norms. While commending civic authorities for creating artificial ponds, he expressed regret that the public had not yet embraced these eco-friendly alternatives.

Turning to noise pollution, Justice Oka said that celebrations across faiths have become synonymous with excessive sound. “Coming to festivals of all religions, we use loudspeakers causing noise pollution that affects human bodies. The music is so loud that some buildings vibrate, the vehicles vibrate,” he observed. Categorically rejecting any claim that such practices are religiously protected, he said, “I don’t believe that any religion permits or encourages the use of loudspeakers in celebrating any of these religious festivals. Any religion. For example, the use of loudspeakers for Azaans by mosques; there is a judgment of the Bombay High Court saying that this is not protected under Article 25 and not part of essential religious practice, and it was approved by the Supreme Court.”

He then asked, “Why do we require loud music to celebrate festivals? Why can’t we realise that it affects human beings, especially the old and infirm? What joy do we get by creating noise pollution either by bursting crackers or by using loudspeakers while celebrating festivals?” Justice Oka said that human beings may protect themselves with earplugs, but birds and animals cannot. “We never think of what happens to birds and animals,” he added.

Justice Oka reminded that judges are also citizens bound by the same fundamental duties as everyone else, but with greater responsibility. “It is all the more necessary for the judges, who are supposed to become role models, to do their fundamental duty of protecting the environment, protecting the living beings, protecting the planet, protecting the seas and lakes,” he said. “They are better equipped than anyone else because they have judicial power to ensure that both citizens and the State perform their duties.” He added, “When we do justice to the environment as judges, we do justice not only to human beings but to all living beings, to the planet Earth itself.”

Cautioning against religious or popular pressure, he said, “Judges should not be influenced by popular or religious sentiments. In environmental justice, which is based on fundamental rights and fundamental duties, there is no place for such sentiments unless there is some genuine practice of religion protected by Article 25.” Justice Oka urged courts to adopt a “zero-tolerance” approach towards environmental violations and impose effective restoration measures where damage can be scientifically reversed.

He said the Constitution calls upon citizens to develop a scientific temper and that religion itself must evolve through reform. “If any religious practice or celebration continues to cause pollution, we must initiate reforms based on science. The Constitution does not tell you not to keep faith in God; it says you must initiate reforms, and reforms can be initiated only on the basis of science,” he said.

Justice Oka also voiced concern over recent amendments to environmental laws that dilute criminal liability for violations, replacing it with mere monetary penalties. He said such changes weaken deterrence and risk eroding public faith in environmental governance.

Full Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJXTtJams3U