Firecracker Curbs: Supreme Court Seeks a Balance Between Religious Sentiment and Public Health
On 12 October 2026, the Supreme Court heard the firecracker issue as part of its ongoing suo motu case (a case the court takes up on its own) on air pollution in the National Capital Region (NCR). The same case also covers stubble burning and solid waste management.
The bench was led by the Chief Justice of India and included Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The bench said it does not want to hurt religious sentiments, but public health must also be protected. It called for a balanced approach.
Justice Bagchi questioned whether bursting firecrackers has any real religious basis.
The Chief Justice cautioned against restrictions that cannot be enforced on the ground. He suggested that people should be educated about which crackers are harmful, so they reject the worst varieties on their own. He also suggested promoting the lighting of lamps, limiting crackers to certain hours, and restricting the sale of the most harmful types.
The amicus curiae (a senior lawyer helping the court) pointed to health risks for children, the elderly and the sick, said time limits are hard to police street by street, and suggested that the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) handle the issue.
The Centre told the court that only green crackers are already allowed under the Arjun Gopal judgment. It noted that in 2025 the court had relaxed Delhi's blanket ban to allow limited sale and use of approved green crackers on fixed days and hours. The matter was listed again for 15 October 2026.
Essential Religious Practices (ERP) Doctrine
The Essential Religious Practices (ERP) doctrine is a test that Indian courts use to decide which religious practices get the full protection of the Constitution. Under this test, a court asks: "Is this practice so central to the religion that the religion would change at its core without it?" If the answer is yes, the practice is "essential" and gets strong protection under Articles 25 and 26. If not, the government can regulate it or even stop it more easily.
When Justice Bagchi asked whether bursting firecrackers has a religious basis, he was raising an ERP-type question: is it a core part of the festival, or a later custom that can be regulated? Even if it were religious, Article 25 is subject to health, so the court can still limit it. The bench chose persuasion and balance rather than a blanket ban, partly because Justice Bagchi and the Chief Justice also sit on the nine-judge bench that is yet to rule on the ERP test itself.
Article 21 and the Right to a Clean Environment
The right to a clean and healthy environment is a Fundamental Right in India, even though the Constitution does not use these exact words. The Supreme Court has read it into Article 21, which protects the right to life. The court's reasoning is simple: you cannot live a real life if the air you breathe, the water you drink and the land you live on are poisoned. So clean air, clean water and freedom from harmful pollution are part of the right to life.
The bench's concern for children, the elderly and the sick is an Article 21 concern: their right to breathe clean air. Against this stands the religious sentiment linked to festivals. The court's search for a "balance", through education, time limits and curbs on the most harmful crackers, is the latest step in a long line of cases that treat clean air as part of the right to life.
Green Crackers: Less-Polluting Firecrackers and the Law Behind Them
Green crackers are firecrackers made with a changed chemical recipe so that they release less smoke, dust and harmful gases than normal crackers. They were developed by the CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI) in Nagpur. They are less polluting, not pollution-free. The Supreme Court has made them the only kind of firecracker allowed in many places.
The Centre reminded the court that only green crackers are allowed under the Arjun Gopal judgment. The Chief Justice's idea of telling people which crackers are harmful and restricting the worst ones builds on this green-cracker system. But the amicus warned that rules on paper do little without enforcement on the ground.
- Hearing date: 12 October 2026; next listing 15 October 2026
- Case: suo motu proceedings on air pollution in Delhi-NCR (firecrackers, stubble burning, solid waste)
- Bench was led by the Chief Justice of India; Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned the religious basis of bursting crackers
- Article 25 (freedom of religion) is subject to public order, morality and health
- Arjun Gopal v. Union of India (2018): only green crackers; fixed time windows; Article 21 health given priority
- In re Noise Pollution (2005): no sound-emitting crackers from 10 pm to 6 am
- October 2025 order: limited sale and use of NEERI-approved green crackers with QR codes in Delhi-NCR around Diwali
- Green crackers: developed by CSIR-NEERI (Nagpur); about 30% lower particulate emissions; licensed by PESO
- Sabarimala nine-judge reference on the ERP doctrine: verdict reserved in May 2026