Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Consider Plea On Alleged Gaps In Firecracker Safety Guidelines

The Delhi High Court on Friday disposed of a public interest litigation seeking a comprehensive regulatory framework for the safe use of firecrackers. 

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the Union Government has recently issued guidelines on the subject and should first be given an opportunity to consider suggestions regarding any perceived shortcomings.

It thus directed the petitioner, Ocular Trauma Society of India, to submit a representation to the competent authority within two weeks— pointing out the alleged lacunae in the “Guidelines for Safe Handling and Use of Firecrackers in India”, issued in 2026 by the Trauma and Burn Division of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

The Court directed the competent authority to consider the representation and take a decision within three months.

The PIL had sought directions to the authorities to formulate guidelines for the safe use of firecrackers, prevent ocular injuries to the public, ensure restricted use of firecrackers in public places and parks, establish a mechanism to monitor firecracker-related accidents and injuries, and provide for penalties against irresponsible use of firecrackers causing harm, including eye injuries.

During the hearing, the respondents placed on record an affidavit along with the 2026 guidelines issued by the Central Government.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that while the guidelines had now been issued, they failed to provide any effective implementation mechanism or prescribe penalties for violations.

Taking note of the submission, the Bench observed that the guidelines had only been framed this year and had not yet been tested in practice.

“Since the guidelines have only been framed in 2026, and effectively yet to be tested, we permit the petitioner to make a representation giving the suggestions to the authority concerned and raising grievances in respect of alleged lacunae in the guidelines,” the Court observed.

The Bench further clarified that if the petitioner remains dissatisfied after the competent authority considers the representation, it would be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings, including filing a fresh writ petition before the High Court.

Accordingly, the PIL was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies, if required, after the representation is decided.

Title: Ocular Trauma Society of India v. Union of India & Ors