Thanks For the Music, NH7 Weekender, But I Didn’t Need the Smoking

Dear organisers of the NH7 Weekender – how could you allow smoking in a public place?

As the crowd waited for Shankar Mahadevan, Rohan Joshi of All India Bakchod suddenly flashed on to the screen with dos and don’ts for attendees of the Bacardi NH7 Weekender, Pune. One of the things he mentioned was that those uncomfortable with people smoking around them should not hesitate to inform the smokers about their discomfort.

In this was an implied acceptance of the fact that smoking could and would take place at the Festival.

There were also other means through which organisers of the “Happiest Music Festival” tacitly accepted public smoking – no “smoking prohibited” signs, absence of smoking areas and sale of cigarette boxes at the venue. As a result, public smoking was rampant at the Festival.

The law clearly prohibits smoking at public places. Did the organisers encourage people to break the law by failing to monitor – even facilitating – public smoking? Here’s a legal analysis.

Anti-Smoking Law

Public smoking harms not just smokers but also those passively ingesting the smoke. Smoking has been identified as a primary cause of several respiratory illnesses –including lung cancer. It increases the risk of coronary heart disease. Statistics indicate that approximately one million people die due to smoking in India, annually.

1. Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty – except according to procedure established by law. In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court explained that the right to enjoyment of pollution free air is a part of the right to life.
2. The issue of public smoking was first addressed by the Kerala High Court in K. Ramakrishnan and Anr. v. State of Kerala. Taking cognizance of the ill effects of public smoking, the High Court held that public smoking of tobacco was illegal and violative of Article 21.
3. In 2001, the Supreme Court in Murli Deora v. Union of India directed smoking at the following public places to be prohibited – auditoriums, hospital buildings, health institutions, educational institutions, libraries, court buildings, public offices and public conveyances, including railways.

The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (“COTPA”) was enacted in 2003. One of its objectives was to protect non-smokers from involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke. Accordingly, the COTPA prohibits smoking in public places. The question that must now be answered is whether the arenas at NH7 Weekender can be classified as a “public place.”

How Would We Define a “Public Place”?

“Public place” is any place to which the public has access, whether as a right or not. This includes the places given in the Murli Deora decision but does not include any open space. What must be decided is whether the arenas at Weekender would be an “auditorium” which is covered as a public place or an “open space” which is excluded from the definition.

The Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, 2008 state that an “open space” does not include places visited by the public such as an open auditorium, stadium and other such places. These would be “public places” where smoking is prohibited even though they would otherwise be “open spaces” exempted from the prohibition.

The arenas at Weekender consisted of a stage surrounded by large tracts of grassed land. The entire area was enclosed by temporary boundaries made of cloth. Therefore the arenas would not be excluded as an open space – instead they would be an open auditorium.

Even if the arenas are not classified as an open auditorium, “other such places” that are visited by the public also fall outside the meaning of “open spaces.” The arenas would certainly be one of “other such places” considering the massive audience present at the event. Every non-smoker would be surrounded by smokers being exposed to constant, heavy passive smoking. It is precisely to prevent this that smoking at “other such places” is prohibited.

Responsibility of the Organisers

It is incumbent upon the owner or manager to ensure that no person smokes at the public place. For this purpose, he must also ensure that no ashtrays, matches, lighters, or other things that facilitate smoking are provided at the public place.

With blatant disregard to the law, the organisers of Weekender took no measures to prevent people from smoking in public. This is made even more egregious because cigarettes were being sold openly at the Festival through several stalls. Public smoking was being actively encouraged through the sale of cigarettes which is in direct contravention of the law.

Other Harmful Effects

Apart from non-smokers being put through a plight, smoking also led to the venue being littered with cigarette butts. Also, there was no heed to the possibility of the grass catching fire despite cigarette butts being known to cause grassfires and bushfires.

It seems that in the interests of business, the organisers ignored the harms that arise out of public smoking.

(Saahil is a final year law student at National Law University, Jodhpur. He is passionate about writing, debating and travelling.)

(The views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)