Firecracker Conundrum in Supreme Court: Travesty towards Culture, Enviornment and Livelihood.

The Supreme Court’s Firecracker Conundrum: Losing the Balance Between Culture, Environment and Livelihood in a Double-Standard!

Targeting Hindu festivities is not a good trend in Indian democracy, which seems to have turned into quiet hypocrisy.

Upananda Brahmachari

The Supreme Court’s recent observation on imposing a nationwide ban on firecrackers has sparked a heated debate. Chief Justice B.R. Gavai’s suggestion that people across the country have a right to pollution-free air, just like Delhi’s residents, raises important questions about the balance between environmental concerns and the livelihoods of millions of people employed in the firecracker industry.

On April 3, 2025, the Supreme Court banned the sale, storage, transportation, and manufacture of firecrackers in the Delhi-NCR region.

“Therefore a policy should be crafted for the entire country. If firecrackers have to be banned, it has to be done for the entire country… Also the poor who are dependent on this industry have to be looked into,” Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai observed on Sept 12, 2025.

The Firecracker Industry: A Significant Contributor to the Economy

The firecracker industry is a significant contributor to the Indian economy, providing direct and indirect employment to over 500,000 families and sustaining a business worth more than ₹6,000 crore annually. Sivakasi, which produces 90% of India’s firecrackers, employs about 300,000 people directly and another 500,000 indirectly. Most of these workers are from economically vulnerable backgrounds and lack alternative job opportunities or transferable skills.

The Human Toll: A Livelihood Crisis in the Making

A nationwide ban on firecrackers would have devastating consequences for the industry and the people employed in it. The court’s own bans have already slashed demand, leaving thousands unemployed. The reality is that families face hunger and destitution, and the ban would only exacerbate the problem.

Cultural Significance of Fireworks

Fireworks are an integral part of cultural celebrations in India, particularly during festivals like Deepavali. A ban on firecrackers would be seen as an attack on cultural traditions and would likely face resistance from communities that have been celebrating these festivals for centuries.

Constitutional Concerns

The Supreme Court’s decision to impose a nationwide ban on firecrackers raises constitutional concerns. Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution guarantees the right to practice a profession or trade, and the court’s decision would amount to judicial overreach. The court has no authority to simply extinguish a legal industry, and at most, it can impose licensing conditions or safety standards.

Elitism and Tone-Deafness

The Supreme Court’s approach to the firecracker industry has been criticized for being elitist and tone-deaf. By ignoring the complex nature of India’s air pollution crisis and the cultural significance of fireworks, the court is confusing symbolism with solution. The reality is that firecrackers are not the only contributor to air pollution, and a ban would not solve the problem.

A Double Standard?

Justice Gavai’s Selective Silence

In the midst of this debate, a curious observation has been made about Chief Justice B.R. Gavai’s stance on cow slaughter during Bakr Eid. As the first Buddhist Chief Justice of India who broadly inclines towards Ambedkar’s ideals, even not believing in the existence of Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. Justice Gavai has been vocal about various issues, including the firecracker ban due to air-pollution. However, his silence on the mass cow-killing that occurs during Bakr Eid throughout India raises questions about selective activism. This issue not only challenges environmental concerns and animal welfare but also hurts Hindu sentiments, sparking debates about cultural and religious sensitivities. The noise pollution from mosque loudspeakers is also a lesser concern for CJI Gavai, most probably. The silence on these matters seems to highlight a double standard, where certain cultural practices are scrutinized while others are seemingly ignored.

Cultural Bias: Democracy or Hypocrisy

The Supreme Court’s observation on imposing a nationwide ban on firecrackers raises important questions about the balance between environmental concerns and the livelihoods of millions of people employed in the firecracker industry. While the court’s intention to protect the environment is laudable, it must consider the economic and cultural implications of its decision. A more nuanced approach that balances environmental concerns with the needs of the industry and the people employed in it is necessary.

The Supreme Court’s focus on Diwali fireworks and crackers has sparked concerns about selective scrutiny of certain cultural practices. While the court’s intention is to address air pollution, the fact that similar concerns are not raised about fireworks used during New Year’s and Shab-e-Barat celebrations or political rallies has led to accusations of bias. This perceived disparity has sparked debates about the role of the judiciary in regulating cultural practices and the need for a more nuanced approach that considers the broader cultural context.

Hindus have faced vilification of their Sanatani sentiments through various Supreme Court verdicts over time including Sabrimala case. Now, the nationwide ban on firecrackers adds to this trend. Targeting Hindu festivities is not a good trend in Indian democracy, which seems to have turned into quiet hypocrisy.
…
__Inputs from The Hindu & The Commune.