On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court asserted that if DJ usage is deemed harmful during Ganesh Chaturthi, it should similarly be considered harmful during Eid celebrations.

This statement came from a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar, while they were reviewing a PIL filed by Zuber Ahmad Nazir Ahmad Peerzade.

The PIL requested that civic authorities be directed to prohibit the use of DJs, dance, music, and laser lights during processions. The petition emphasized that neither the holy Quran nor Hadith endorses the use of DJ sound systems and laser lights for celebrating Eid Milad-un-Nabi, nor was such celebratory practice advocated by the Prophet.

The petitioner contended that all religious festivals held in public spaces must comply with the Noise Pollution Rules, asserting that no religion or sect has a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) and 25 of the Constitution of India to use DJs, speakers, or other noise-producing instruments. The bench requested Advocate Owais Pechkar, who represented the petitioner, to present scientific studies demonstrating the harmful effects of laser beams. In response, Pechkar indicated that he did not possess such material. The bench then remarked,

“Why didn’t you do research? There is a hue and cry about mobile towers. Have you gone through study? How do we adjudicate unless there is a study that laser beams have harmful effects? You should assist the court in giving effective direction. We are not experts. I do not know L of laser,” the bench said.

Pechkar then presented a video featuring a scientist discussing the harmful effects of laser beams. However, the bench replied, "There may be divergent views among experts. Where is your study? You should have delved deeper into research and consulted some scientists. This is an annual event. If DJ use is harmful for Ganesh Chaturthi, then it should also be considered harmful for Eid," the bench stated.

The high court observed that the issue of banning DJs had already been addressed in a previous judgment. Consequently, the bench disposed of the petition, referencing the earlier decision.