The Fault in ‘Green Cracker’ Season Plan

Introduction-

Every year between October and January, India (specifically North India) faces its most severe air pollution crisis. While stubble burning, meteorological conditions and urban emissions are major contributors of this, the usage of firecrackers during festivals lined up one after the other- Diwali, Gurupurab, Christmas and New Year during these very months, consistently add dangerous spike to the already toxic air levels. In an attempt to curb this seasonal deterioration, the Union Government introduced the concept of “green crackers” in 2018 which was developed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research–National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR–NEERI). These were promoted as “eco-friendly alternatives” that promised to reduce the emission of particulate matter by approximately 30% as compared to the traditional firecrackers and eliminate harmful chemicals like Barium Nitrate which is known to aggravate respiratory ailments.

The Supreme Court of India, in Arjun Gopal v. Union of India, endorsed this initiative as a compromise between cultural practices and environmental concerns and allowed only the manufacture and sale of certified green crackers with a fixed time for their usage. However, seven years later, this legal promise stands in a stark contrast to the choking air outside.

The Problem with Green-Crackers-

The Green Cracker scheme continues to fail every year as a result of a convergence of policy loopholes, regulatory inertia and laxity in the enforcement. To start with, there remains no uniform national standard or legal definition of what qualifies as a green cracker. Investigations by the Centre for Science and Environment and reports of the Central Pollution Control Board shed some light on the prevalence of counterfeit and non-compliant fireworks in the market, and the QR code verification system, which should have purportedly verified the genuine nature of green crackers, is usually not present or functional. 

Second, enforcement is reactionary and not preventive. The various judicial directives and state notifications received annually arrive only weeks before Diwali and as such, there is no meaningful and structured implementation of the same. Retailers are lost, enforcement departments unprepared and people buy and use fireworks in large numbers as usual. This last minute firefighting stands in contrast to what should have been a predictable, season long regime.

Lastly, there is incongruity between the Centre and State policies, which makes the situation worse. Where some states have completely prohibited them, some states have allowed selective use of them or have not been able to embrace green cracker norms at all. The National Green Tribunal has commented on this regulatory gap and it has pointed out that the compliance is more or less paper-based and does not translate into being practiced. It is not the concept of green crackers that is in problem, but the inability to regulate this problem, timely, coordinately, and in an enforceable manner.

Indian Judiciary and Firecrackers-

The firecracker control in India had developed rather sporadically by the decisions of the courts rather than through any sustained legislative planning. During the last ten years the Supreme Court and the National Green Tribunal have again and again intervened in the matter, often just a few weeks before the festival season is to be celebrated, by imposing or modifying bans on the use of firecrackers.  The movement began with a court case through a PIL filed by three minors, who were led by environment lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan in Arjun Gopal v. Union of India. They demanded firecrackers to be banned within the area of Delhi-NCR as the quality of air was diminishing. 

In October 2017, the Supreme Court stayed the sale of conventional firecrackers in the Delhi-NCR area during Diwali acknowledging that cracker emissions are the direct cause of the post-festival pollution. 

The Court, in October 2018, passed an unprecedented order to permit only the production of green crackers, i.e. inexpensive fireworks that were produced under the supervision of CSIRNEERI, and prohibit the production and sale of any form of cracker that contains the dangerous substance barium nitrate. It also established definite bursting times (such as 8:00 10:00 pm., Diwali-day) and allowed state governments to implement the same rules locally. 

In spite of the fact that this move was celebrated as a compromise between cultural values and environmental conservation, it also transferred the roles of the executive to the judiciary system and created a weak framework that is bound to the annual court review. 

During the COVID19 pandemic, the National Green Tribunal expanded out of Delhi-NCR to cover all non-attainment cities -the regions that are continuously breaching the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in 2020. During the period of high pollution, the NGT completely prohibited firecrackers due to the health of people and the risk of diseases associated with respiratory system during a pandemic. It reported that the adherence to the green-cracker directive of the Supreme Court was not high since outlawed crackers were produced, sold, and consumed. 

Prior to Diwali in October 2024, the Supreme Court reiterated its 2018 instructions as applicable countrywide and threatened states against passing opposing orders. It said that the selling or bursting of prohibited crackers is a contravention of Article 21 since it robs other people clean air.  

While this year the Supreme Court has allowed the bursting of crackers in order to “let children enjoy” which was also followed by a note of thanks by the Delhi CM to the court for allowing the use of cracker quoted as "This ruling respects public sentiments and excitement for festivals like Diwali, and also reflects a balanced outlook for safeguarding the environment.”

Conclusion-

India’s “green cracker” experiment exposes a governance gap: science and courts moved quickly, but administration failed to consistently deliver cleaner air despite a technically plausible compromise between cultural practice and environmental protection. The initiative’s repeated shortfalls in curbing post‑festival pollution show that incremental fixes cannot substitute for durable state capacity and coordinated enforcement. Each year, controls on festive emissions default to court‑led firefighting, with the Supreme Court and the National Green Tribunal stepping in to safeguard the constitutional right to a clean environment under Article 21, rather than permanent institutions ensuring compliance as a matter of routine governance. This pattern persists despite evolving jurisprudence that frames freedom from severe air pollution, and even from climate harms, as integral to the right to life and to the State’s affirmative duty to prevent and deter environmental injury.

A credible solution demands structural reform rather than episodic orders: long‑horizon legislation with clear standards, steady administrative preparedness, harmonized inter‑state rules, and firm, dissuasive enforcement against violations. Only such institutional changes can convert the right to clean air from a courtroom guarantee into everyday reality and make any “green cracker” compromise effective, replacing ad hoc judicial interventions with predictable, accountable executive governance.

The Blog has been authored by Tanu Mehta, a II Year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) Student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar.