The Supreme Court on Thursday said it was not inclined to impose a complete ban on firecrackers but warned authorities that failure to enforce existing restrictions could force it to take a harsher stand [Arjun Gopal and Others v. Union of India and Others]

Importantly, the Court stressed the need to raise public awareness through print and television campaigns encouraging people to celebrate Diwali without firecrackers.The Bench suggested involving prominent personalities, including cricketer Virat Kohli, in these efforts.

“You can take help from celebrated cricketers like Virat Kohli or somebody. You can request him to make a segment that let us make this Diwali as one that is enjoyable. Let us enjoy the spirit of the festival of light,” the Court said.

A Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale said its orders regulating firecracker use would become a “mockery” if they are not enforced on the ground.

“We also understand the sentiment of the public. Somebody wants to celebrate… Therefore, we are not inclined to impose a complete ban because, again, it will have a spiralling effect. But having said that, please don’t push us to take a harsh stand on it,” Justice Sundresh remarked.

The Court asked what authorities had done to enforce the restrictions when the firecracker ban in Delhi-NCR was temporarily relaxed last year. No enforcement data had been placed before it, the Bench noted.

“There is no point in passing orders unless you really give effect to them on the ground. It becomes a mere mockery then… It is not an adversarial matter. It concerns everyone. Every living being....,” the Bench said.

The Court was hearing a 2015 case in which it has been passing orders imposing restrictions of firecrackers in Delhi and other north Indian States which are affected by air pollution between October to January.

Due to the persistent problem of poor air quality in Delhi, the Court had earlier banned the use of firecrackers in Delhi.

However, in 2025, the top court permitted the sale and bursting of green firecrackers in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR) during the Diwali festival for a limited period.

The Court had then clarified that the relaxation was only on a test case basis and subject to enforcement and monitoring safeguards.

During the hearing on Thursday, the amicus curiae submitted that the authorities had not filed a comprehensive report on the implementation of the October 15, 2025 order. She questioned the request for a fresh relaxation without first assessing the impact of last year’s exercise.

“Now, with no report filed by them for one year, again on the eve of the next festival, they are here again seeking equities and equitable orders from your lordships,” she submitted.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the Court’s restrictions had repeatedly been breached despite contempt of court proceedings. Citing a CBI report, he said manufacturers had procured large stocks of barium despite successive prohibitions.

“Orders after orders have been passed by this Court. Every single order has been violated and breached. Contempt petitions have been filed… They got stocks of barium despite seven bans being imposed by this Court,” he submitted.

Sankaranarayanan argued that the effects of firecracker pollution lasted well beyond the bursting, with harmful PM2.5 particles remaining suspended in the air for months. He also raised concerns regarding alleged child labour in the industry, the use of toxic substances and deaths and injuries cited in the petitioners’ latest application.

Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, representing certain firecracker manufacturers, opposed a complete ban. He argued that prohibition had encouraged black-market sales, Chinese products and unlicensed goods.

“A complete ban does not work. It has resulted in proliferation of black market, Chinese products, unlicensed goods. Therefore, regulation has worked better than a complete ban. It’s not lungs vs firecrackers,” he submitted.

Deepak urged the Court to tighten regulation by making licence and manufacturing-site details public, checking QR codes and cancelling licences for violations.

Referring to the amicus’s submissions, the Court asked Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati about the enforcement measures taken pursuant to its October 2025 order.

Bhati, appearing for the Union government and the Delhi government, submitted that pollution had increased during the period of relaxation. She added that the CPCB had filed AQI data, but no enforcement data had been placed before the Court.

“We have pulled up our socks on all of these areas. We have to file an affidavit,” Bhati submitted.

Taking note of this, the Court said repeated orders would serve little purpose without enforcement.

It then emphasised on the need to raise public awareness through ad campaigns to encourage people to celebrate Diwali without firecrackers.

The Court also suggested educating children on how to celebrate festivals.

“Probably it’s time for us to give some directions to educate children on how to celebrate the festival actually,” it remarked.

The Court further urged authorities to send officers to check for violations, particularly on the days when firecracker use is permitted.

“You really have to call all your officers. Please concentrate on these days. Your officers have to see what is happening on the ground… if you issue challans, cancel licences and then file some cases, things would automatically come down,” the Court remarked.

[Read Live Coverage]