The ruling on firecrackers is a balanced one

Much will now depend on how the Supreme Court’s order is implemented

The Supreme Court’s judgment on firecrackers is a balanced one. It is not a radical one, such as its late 1990s judgment that ruled that all public vehicles in Delhi run only on CNG, but that is probably because the facts of the case (and the science) when it comes to firecrackers aren’t as clear cut as they were in that instance. It is unfortunate that there still isn’t much authoritative research on Delhi’s annual badair problem. What is known is that it is a problem caused by vehicular pollution, construction dust, dust from the desert that is borne into Delhi by winds, stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana, and, momentarily, firecrackers on Diwali (and also on New Year and Christmas). What we also know is that it is a problem facilitated by Delhi’s location, in the Indo-gangetic plains, not far from the hills, and east of the great Thar desert, and the onset of winter. What we do not know is the relative influence of each facilitating factor. And what we do not know is the contribution of each of the sources responsible for the bad air in Delhi and its environs.

That said, it is imperative to regulate each contributor and there the court does seem to have done enough: it has ordered the use of green firecrackers; limited their use to between 8 pm and 10 pm on Diwali (and 11.55 pm and 12.30 am on Christmas and New Year); and banned their online sale. It has also asked local administrations to identify, for community celebrations that involve firecrackers wherever possible, public spaces where people can burst crackers.

Much will now depend on how the order is implemented. The court’s judgment makes it clear that the local police will be responsible, and held in contempt of court should they fail in their duty.