"Religious freedom is not an automatic licence to harm public health." Discuss with reference to judicial regulation of firecrackers.

Article 25 protects the freedom to practise religion, but the text makes it "subject to public order, morality and health". Courts also read Article 21 to include a right to a healthy life. Firecracker regulation in Delhi-NCR shows how the judiciary balances festive custom against everyone's right to clean air.

Constitutional basis for limiting festive freedom

• Article 25's own limits: religious practice cannot override the health of others. This is the harm principle written into the Constitution.
• Article 48A (a Directive Principle) and Article 51A(g) (a Fundamental Duty) bind both the State and citizens to protect the environment.
• Vulnerable groups: COVID-recovered patients have publicly urged people to show restraint because of their lung damage [1].

How the Supreme Court has regulated firecrackers

• Scientific gatekeeping: the Court held that barium nitrate is not recommended by NEERI [2].
• Burden on industry: in April 2025 the Court refused to relax the NCR ban unless it was shown that green crackers cause only minimal pollution [3].
• Calibrated relief: in October 2025 it allowed only NEERI-certified green crackers, for a short window and at designated sites. Violators lose their PESO licences, and CAQM must report on the impact [4].
• Institutional backing: Centres of Excellence for Green Firecrackers have been set up at CSIR-NEERI, Nagpur, and CSIR-CECRI, Karaikudi [5].

Limits and concerns

• Green does not mean clean: green crackers cut particulates by only 30–80% [4], so heavy use can cancel the gain.
• Enforcement gaps: NEERI found QR codes being passed to unregistered manufacturers [4]. The Court itself has recently signalled that blanket bans are hard to enforce.
• Judicial overreach: fixing sale dates and locations is executive work, and arguably belongs with CAQM.
• Livelihoods: workers in the Sivakasi manufacturing belt bear the cost of reformulation.

The judiciary has moved from outright bans to certified, time-bound use. This approach respects tradition but treats health as non-negotiable. The way forward is for CAQM to set a single policy for the whole airshed. That should come with tamper-proof certification, transition support for workers and public awareness campaigns. Festivals celebrated this way meet both Article 21's promise and SDG 3 (health) and SDG 11 (sustainable cities). Faith and fresh air can coexist.