Bombay High Court
Courts On Its Own Motion vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Its ... on 18 January, 2023
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Vrushali V. Joshi
957-SMPIL-01-21 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
SUO MOTU PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.01 OF 2021
Court on its own motion
-vs-
State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Shri Devendra V. Chauhan, Amicus Curiae.
Shri D. P. Thakare, Additional Government Pleader for respondent
Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 6.
Shri J. B. Kasat, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 17.
Shri M. I. Dhatrak, Advocate fr respondent Nos.15, 19 and 23.
Shri A. A. De, Advocate for respondent No.21.
Shri S. S. Sanyal, Advocate for respondent No.27.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : January 18, 2023
The learned Amicus Curiae invites our attention to a news
report published in The Hitavada CityLine on 16/01/2023
wherein death of a ten year old boy has been reported on
account of injuries sustained on account of use of nylon maanjha
while accompanying his father on a two wheeler. It is
submitted that despite various directions issued earlier, the use
of nylon maanjha continues to prevail. It is suggested that steps
have to be taken to prevent the use and sale of nylon maanjha
during the entire year and not during the kite-flying season. He
suggests that directions may be issued to curb and prohibit use
of nylon maanjha by calling upon members of public to dispose
957-SMPIL-01-21 2/4
of the same without the threat of any prosecution by providing a
a particular window period.
He has invited our attention to the judgment of Delhi
High Court in Sanser Pal Singh vs. Union of India and ors. 2022
SCC Online Del 2418 wherein the Government of National Capital
Territory of Delhi, Department of Environment has issued a
notification dated 10/01/2017 banning the use of nylon
maanjha in the entire area of the National Capital Territory.
According to him the State Government should consider this
aspect and come up with a similar notification to be issued so as
to enforce directions issued under Section 5 of the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986. The Task Force constituted could then
ensure compliance of such notification. It is then submitted
that despite directions having been issued to the Cyber Cell to
prohibit sale of nylon maanjha, even today on-line
advertisements can be seen for sale of nylon maanjha. The
respondent Nos.30 and 31 have not responded despite notices
being served on them. It is thus submitted that appropriate
steps deserve to be taken in that regard.
Before proposing to issue further directions, we would
like to get response of the Ministry of Environment, State of
Maharashtra in the matter of considering issuance of a
957-SMPIL-01-21 3/4
notification similar to the one issued by the Government of
National Capital Territory of Delhi dated 10/01/2017. Since
the said Ministry has not been impleaded as a party, leave is
granted to implead it as respondent No.32. Amendment be
carried out forthwith. Shri D. P. Thakare, learned Additional
Government Pleader waives notice for the said respondent.
Instructions be obtained on taking necessary steps for issuance
of a similar notification as issued by the Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi, Department of Environment dated
10/01/2017 that has been referred to in Sanser Pal Singh
(supra).
Shri J. B. Kasat, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.3 to obtain instructions as to whether a call can be made on
behalf of the Municipal Corporation to members of public to
dispose of nylon maanjha with them within a particular period
without the threat of prosecution during that period failing
which further action could be taken for non-compliance of the
directions issued earlier. The modalities in that regard can be
indicated in the affidavit. Similarly, Shri D. P. Thakare, learned
Additional Government Pleader to indicate the steps taken by
the Cyber Cell for prohibiting on-line sale of nylon maanjha and
especially the continuing advertisements at the behest of
957-SMPIL-01-21 4/4
respondent Nos.31 and 32. Similarly, the policy decision that
has been referred to in the order dated 28/07/2015 passed in
Criminal Writ Petition No.20/2015 (Riddhi Siddhi Parang
Vyapari Association, Nagpur and anr. vs. The State of
Maharashtra, Mumbai and ors.) with regard to banning the sale
of nylon maanjha be placed on record. Instructions also be
obtained from the respondent No.2 as to whether any ad-hoc
compensation could be made available to the parents of the
unfortunate child who was the victim of injuries sufferred due to
use of nylon maanjha as per news report dated 16/01/2023.
After receiving the aforesaid response, the Court would
consider issuance of further directions.
Stand over 25/01/2023.
Authenticated copy of this order be provided to the
counsel for the parties to act upon.
(Mrs Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)
Digitally signed byASMITA
ADWAIT
AsmitaBHANDAKKAR
Signing Date:18.01.2023
19:19:35
