E-Paper
Sign in
HC junks PIL on noise during IPL matches, says let there be some cacophony
An advocate filed the public interest litigation (PIL) in 2014, alleging that during the IPL matches the noise pollution norms and regulations were violated.
The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL alleging violation of noise pollution norms during IPL matches, saying let there be some cacophony in society as people are bound to cheer and shout during cricket matches.
Kapil Soni, an advocate, filed the public interest litigation (PIL) in 2014, alleging that during the IPL matches held in 2013 at Mumbai’s Wankhede stadium and Pune’s Subrata Roy Sahara stadium, the noise pollution norms and regulations were violated.
READ | IPL franchises discuss new teams, BCCI wants stability first
Hence, he demanded that legal action be initiated against the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) and heavy penalty be imposed.
According to the petition, during the 2013 Indian Premier League (IPL), the matches held in Pune and Mumbai began at 8 pm and went on till midnight, including the prize distribution ceremony.
A division bench of Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice N M Jamdar said on Monday that during cricket matches, when a player hits a boundary or a sixer or when a wicket is taken, people are bound to cheer and shout.
“Let the society have some fun and enjoyment... let there be some cacophony in it. Let people enjoy,” Chief Justice Nandrajog said.
READ | Jacques Kallis steps down as Kolkata Knight Riders head coach
The bench also took note of the fact that the petitioner was a resident of Dahisar, located around 40 km away from the Wankhede stadium in south Mumbai.
“How is the petitioner affected by something that is happening so far away? None of those people who stay in the vicinity of the stadium have complained,” the court said while dismissing the petition.
Soni, in his PIL, claimed loudspeakers were being used to play music during the matches and even after the prescribed time deadline of 10 PM, and thus violated provisions of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Act.
