AUGUSTO RODRIGUES
PORVORIM: Establishments that have the licence to play music must install CCTVs as a pre-condition to getting the relevant permissions to operate. The ongoing High Court proceedings over noise pollution in the Anjuna-Vagator belt threw up this crucial point when the case came up for hearing on Tuesday.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
CCTV footage from these establishments is vital since police have claimed on multiple instances that they have not found loud music playing after the 10 pm deadline when they reached the spot following a complaint. CCTV footage would be crucial to ascertain exactly when the music stopped – before or after the deadline.
Tuesday saw the first hearing of Contempt Petition 12 of 2023 with new judge AS Chandurkar, alongside Justice Nivedita P Mehta, addressing the issue of establishments playing amplified music after 10 pm. Amicus Curiae Nigel da Costa Frias proposed that such establishments should be required to install CCTV systems, a suggestion the two justices accepted.
Costa Frias pointed out the recurring issue of establishments violating noise regulations, with police reports often indicating no evidence of loud music after officers visit the locations. “It is only through CCTV footage that we will be able to come to the truth and the Court should direct Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) to make it mandatory, for all seeking consent to operate, to have CCTV,” Costa Frias told Justice Chandurkar, who had replaced Justice MS Karnik in the matter. “It is through CCTV that the court will be able to reach the truth,” he added.
Costa Frias also presented an interim report from two new members of the Noise Monitoring Committee (NMC) – retired Captain Gerald Fernandes and Kamlakar Naik. However, the report faced opposition from Advocate General Devidas Pangam, who contested the findings, particularly regarding areas outside the committee’s jurisdiction. “The new members were appointed to oversee Anjuna and Vagator, yet their report includes meetings with police in Calangute and Baga, which do not fall under their jurisdiction,” Pangam argued.
In response, Costa Frias defended the relevance of the report, stating, “While the members may have overstepped their jurisdiction, the issues raised in Calangute and Baga are pertinent to Anjuna and Vagator as well. Let geographical boundaries not hinder the process of ensuring the right to peaceful sleep for all.”
The Advocate General continued to challenge the validity of the NMC’s interim report, asserting that it should not hold weight due to jurisdictional concerns. Costa Frias countered, stating that the need for CCTV in establishments playing loud music applied universally, including in Anjuna and Vagator.
The hearing also addressed a proposal in the interim report calling for electronic signboards to be displayed at the entrance of establishments playing amplified music outdoors. Additionally, Section 2(b) of the report emphasized the need for mandatory consent from the GSPCB and permission from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to play amplified music. Any establishment failing to secure these approvals should face closure, the report stated.
As the hearing progressed, Costa Frias urged the court to require the police to provide a status report on the First Information Reports (FIRs) filed thus far. He also emphasized the importance of CCTV systems in curbing noise violations, a stance that was echoed by Advocate General Pangam. “Loud music should not be allowed after 10 pm and it is important that the GSPCB makes it mandatory for all establishments to have CCTVs installed before giving them consent to operate,” Pangam agreed.
The police have previously presented evidence of numerous complaints regarding loud music, but their reports often indicate that no music was heard upon their visits to the establishments. After hearing the arguments, the justices ruled that all establishments playing music after 10 pm must have CCTV coverage.
“Fifteen FIRs have been filed, and we need to know their status,” Costa Frias pressed during the hearing. Justice Chandurkar then inquired, “Who is the licensing authority?” “The licensing authority is the Deputy Collector,” responded Pangam. Justice Chandurkar further ordered that the Superintendent of Police submit an Action Taken Report on the FIRs within two weeks.
