Govt told to act against 4 cops who ignored noise pollution plaint

MUMBAI: SPCA recommends action against Pune police for inaction on noise pollution complaints, raising hopes for stricter enforcement in Mumbai.

MUMBAI: What will it take to crack down on noise pollution in Mumbai, one of the noisiest cities in the world? What will it take for the police to show up and act?

Govt told to act against 4 cops who ignored noise pollution plaint

A new path has opened up via a case in Pune. Based on a complaint by a policeman, action is now being recommended against four police officers in Pune, for not acting when they were called to a noisy wedding that had firecrackers allegedly violating the noise pollution laws.

This spells hope for a city of ceaseless noise – from construction activity, loudspeakers, festivals, weddings, various celebrations, and the honking of traffic and traffic jams.

In the Pune case, the State Police Complaint Authority (SPCA), which hears complaints against police personnel, has cracked down. In its order delivered on Tuesday, the SPCA has directed the state home department to initiate action against the four officers for their inept handling of a case relating to noise pollution at a wedding hall in Bibvewadi, Pune.

While recommending a departmental inquiry against the police officers, the SPCA has also directed the state to sensitise police officers while handling cases relating to noise pollution.

The SPCA has observed that, not only in Pune, but across the state, time restrictions relating to noise pollution are not enforced during festivals, weddings and other celebrations. It has also directed the government to issue strict instructions to the police for prompt action and investigation into noise-pollution cases.

“For this, police officers should be adequately sensitised to the provisions of the environmental laws and directives, to ensure their effective implementation. The police should also be equipped with necessary tools to measure sound levels, enabling them to take appropriate action in noise-pollution cases. Their approach towards environmental law and their performance in this regard should be duly reflected in their performance appraisal reports,” the order states.

In its order, the SPCA passed strictures against a deputy commissioner of police (DCP), an assistant commissioner of police (ACP), senior police inspector and a sub-inspector, for negligence in handling a case relating to noise pollution and the use of the loudspeakers in a residential area.

The order was issued on a complaint filed by retired ACP Arvind Patil with the Bibvewadi police in December 2019. Patil had complained against noise pollution due to the bursting of firecrackers at a wedding hall near his residence. Patil had submitted a written complaint to police sub-inspector Yash Borate and later met senior police officer Kumar Ghadage. Despite this, the police did not register a First Information Report (FIR). ACP Sunil Kalgutkar and DCP Suhas Bavche too did not pay heed to his complaint, according to Patil, prompting him to move the Bombay High Court, which in January 2022 directed the police to file an FIR.

Patil stated that the police could not find enough evidence because of the time that had elapsed between the incident and the investigation after the FIR was lodged. He then moved the SPCA, seeing action against the police officials involved. The SPCA, headed by Justice Shrihari Davare (retd), and comprising Umakant Mitkar, member, civil eminence, and Vijay Satbir Singh, retired IAS officer, has now ordered action against the police officers.

“The SPCA has found that the police did not take action although it was a cognisable officer under various laws, including the Environment (Protection) Act, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, and Criminal Procedure Code. Instead of registering an FIR, they wasted time on a preliminary inquiry, which was not necessary, according to the guidelines of the Supreme Court in the Lalita Kumar Vs State of Uttar Pradesh case of 2013. The police officers have been found guilty of inaction and taking a casual approach in investigating the matter,” said an official with the SPCA.

The order goes on to state, “The order should be treated as a preliminary inquiry for the purpose of instituting disciplinary proceedings against the officers under Section 22R(2)(b) of the Maharashtra Police (Amendment & Continuance) Act. The government should direct the institution of disciplinary proceedings or any other legal action against the delinquent officers as per the law.”

“We expect the order to help in the implementation of environment- and noise pollution-related laws in letter and spirit,” said Vijay Satbir Singh.

Officials of the state home department said that orders delivered by the SPCA, established as part of police reforms ordered by the Supreme Court in 2006, are taken seriously. “Action will have to be taken against the officers, or if no action is possible, the government must justify this,” he said.

Sumaira Abdul Ali, environmental activist and founder of Awaaz Foundation, said the SPCA order sends out a clear message. “In this case, the complainant is a police officer, who knows how to pursue the case. Hopefully, more and more such cases will come to the fore so that there is concrete action against noise pollution.”

She said that the police do take action but they are selective. “For instance, they act on complaints of individuals violating time restrictions but do not take action against political functions. During Ganapati and other festivals, complaints are taken post-facto, but no action is taken to stop the pollution. The Bombay High Court had ordered that all police stations should be provided with decibel meters, but the police scarcely use them to initiate action on their own.”