Finding the police “totally helpless” during last year’s festive season, the MP High Court Directs Indore Police To Appoint Ward Volunteers who can promptly report persons and vehicles causing noise pollution.
Indore: Two volunteers from every ward of the city are to tell the Indore Police at once about people and vehicles causing noise pollution, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed, while the Indore Municipal Corporation has been told to bring the loudspeaker noise of its garbage collection vehicles down to permissible limits [Amitabh Upadhyay and Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others].
The order of October 26 in the public interest litigation, WP No. 25397 of 2023, was passed by a division bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Jai Kumar Pillai, which had reserved it on October 5. The bench also found that the State had not properly complied with its earlier direction on silence zones.
What the bench had seen for itself
The petition, filed in 2023, seeks enforcement of noise pollution norms in Indore. The Court has pulled up the authorities at earlier hearings, and a September 2026 order recorded that the judges, on their way home from court, had themselves found loudspeakers playing beyond permissible limits. On September 24, 2026, it had told the State to publish a list of silence zones in daily newspapers of wide circulation.
At the latest hearing, counsel for the State produced newspaper excerpts in place of a proper publication, and the bench said that this was not proper compliance of its order. It recorded that the police had not been able to deal with the problem:
“the police were totally helpless to curb and handle the noise pollution”
The judges said they had “also witnessed and experienced unbridled noise pollution” but “still refuse[d] to give up on the city of Indore”. They further observed that the noise from the Municipal Corporation’s garbage collection vehicles crosses all legal norms.
Five directions
One: the respondents must publish the list of silence zones, as already directed on September 24, in a proper publication in daily newspapers of wide circulation, and must invite suggestions for declaring other prominent places as silence zones.
Two: the sound pollution measuring device that Assistant Commissioner of Police Ashish Patel showed the Court is to be supplied to police personnel at every police station in Indore. Each station’s contact number for noise complaints is to be published in newspapers and on the Indore Police website.
Three: the respondents must place on record the noise complaints received by police stations across the city and any suo motu action taken by the police, in particular during the last Navratri and Dussehra festivities.
Four: the Station House Officer of every police station must appoint two volunteers from each ward. They are to inform the police promptly about persons or vehicles causing noise pollution and to record video of them on their mobile phones, and the police must act on such complaints in accordance with law.
Five: the Indore Municipal Corporation must bring the loudspeaker noise of its garbage collection vehicles down to the permissible decibel limits for such vehicles, or to at least 25 percent of the present volume. A compliance report is to be filed within a further three weeks, and the matter is listed in the week commencing November 23, 2026.
The rules behind the order
The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 govern noise in India. They set ambient noise standards for industrial, commercial, residential and silence zones, and define a silence zone as an area of not less than 100 metres around hospitals, educational institutions and courts, as declared by the competent authority. In its 2005 ruling in In Re: Noise Pollution, the Supreme Court treated unregulated noise as an infringement of the right to a peaceful environment under Article 21 of the Constitution.
From reminders to a method
The Court has gone beyond reminding the authorities of the rules and has set out how they are to be enforced on the ground: equipment at police stations, published complaint numbers, ward-level volunteers who record violations, and records of complaints from the recent festival season. Citizen volunteers do not replace police action, since the order requires the police to act on their reports in accordance with law, but they give the bench a way to test whether complaints lead to action when the matter returns in November.
Case Title: Amitabh Upadhyay and Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [WP No. 25397 of 2023]
Bench: Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Jai Kumar Pillai, Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench)
Date of Order: October 26, 2026 (reserved on October 5, 2026)
Appearances: Advocate Abhinav Dhanodkar for the petitioners; Government Advocate Pradyumna Kibe for the State; Advocate Rishabh Singh Chauhan for respondent no. 4; a copy of the order is to go to Advocate Rishi Tiwari for the Indore Municipal Corporation