Subscribe for perks & to support LI

Your Interests & Preferences: Personalise your reading

Which best describes your role and/or interests?

I work in a law firm
I work for a company / in-house
I'm a litigator at the bar
I'm a law student
Aspiring law student
Other
Save setting
Or click here to show more preferences...

I am interested in the following types of stories (uncheck to hide from frontpage)

Firms / In-House
Deals
Courts
Legal Education

Always show me: (overrides the above)

Exclusives & Editor's Picks

Website Look & Feel

Light Text on Dark Background

Save preferences


Note: Your preferences will be saved in your browser. You can always change your settings by clicking the Your Preferences button at the top of every page.

Reset preferences to defaults?

Are cell phones bad for you? SC takes note of Bhushan PIL raising radiation science [READ PETITION]

Are cell phones and their infra bad for you?Are cell phones and their infra bad for you?

The PIL titled Dr Naresh Chand Gupta v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) and Others (WP civil no 316/2016) was listed (as item no 23) for hearing today in court no 1 of the Supreme Court presided by CJI and Justice Khanwilker.

The petition showcases scientific literature from India and abroad regarding ill effects of radiation (radio frequency radiation or RFR) from cell phones and towers in humans and animals. The ill effects range from headache, memory impairment, sleep troubles to cancer in human beings.

RFR has also been attributed to declining population of sparrow and other bird species as well as huge decline in beehives.

The petition cites the BioInitiative Reports of 2007 and 2012 which called for immediate reduction in radiation norms worldwide after a review of about 4000 scientific studies. The literature provide overwhelming evidence in favour of drastically reducing the present radiation norms in India.

Further, the petition relies on several reports of committees formed by various ministries and the Parliament to show that there is no mechanism in India to ensure compliance of even the present norms by telecom companies and mobile phones' manufacturers/importers.

The petition asks the court to prohibit the installation of cell towers in the vicinity of residential areas, hospitals, schools, wildlife and other sensitive areas. The petition also makes a case for a drastic reduction of exposure norms for cell phones and towers.

The court issued notices to all respondents - NOIDA, Indus Towers Ltd and the Ministry of Telecom and Broadcast. Yesterday, Gupta's petition was argued by Prashant Bhushan, assisted by Harshvardhan.

The case is tagged with another similar case, Bhupesh Segal vs DDA. Bhupesh Segal's petition is an appeal against the verdict of NGT, with senior advocate ML Varma is appearing for the petitioner, and the DDA represented by senior advocates Ramji Srinivasan and Gopal Jain, alongside other advocates. The next hearings are listed for 22 July.

The NGT's verdict on the case is also published below.

Read the Prashant Bhushan cell radiation PIL (PDF)

NGT judgment re cell phone towers from December 2015 (PDF)

Photo by Jordan Mowbray

Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
(alt+shift+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.
refresh Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments. Sort chronologically
1
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 10 Aug 18, 11:22
Hi please include the NTP report on RFR radiation available for download here- ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr596peerdraft.pdf? , and please check the conclusion on page 103, it is shocking. Also include the ramazzini institute study on tower radiation. these are more recent studies and released in 2018,
Thank you
Reply Report to LI


Latest comments