Deepak Sharma
A Tradition Turned Fatal
The joyous tradition of kite flying has, over the past several years, transformed into a life-threatening menace in the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir. A growing number of people, from children as young as six to the elderly above seventy, have fallen victim to killer kite strings made of synthetic or nylon materials, often coated with glass or metal powder. Recently, a 36-year-old man tragically lost his life in Jammu after his throat was slit by such a thread while riding a motorcycle.
What once symbolized freedom and festivity is now claiming lives, causing permanent injuries, amputations, and defacement of limbs, and leaving the public in fear.
The flawed approach: What Has Already Been Banned Cannot Be Re-Banned
What is most troubling is that despite the existence of binding legal instruments banning these materials, Authorities/District Magistrates continue to issue repetitive and legally flawed orders.
The National Green Tribunal (NGT), vide its judgment dated 11 July 2017 in the case titled, has already imposed a complete ban on the manufacture, possession, sale, and use of synthetic or nylon kite threads, including those coated with glass or metal. The NGT, whose jurisdiction extends over J&K, also directed that violations must be prosecuted under stringent statutes such as The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972,The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, andThe Indian Penal Code (now BNS).
In compliance with the NGT’s directions given earlier, the Government of Jammu & Kashmir had already issued SRO 126 dated 07-04-2016 under the J&K Non-Biodegradable Material (Management, Handling, and Disposal) Act, 2007, which prohibits the procurement, sale, stocking, or use of nylon kite threads (manjha) across the entire UT.
The SRO was issued pursuant to the Hon’ble High Court’s order dated 04-04-2016 in WPPIL No. 3/2016, which mandated the state to monitor and enforce this ban through all District Superintendents of Police and SHOs.
In such a legal framework, there is no need for individual District Magistrates to repeatedly issue orders banning what has already been banned by superior authorities. These fragmented and temporary orders under Section 163 of the BNSS (earlier Section 144 CrPC) serve no real purpose, especially when a comprehensive statutory and more stringent legal and judicial mechanism already exists.
The Flawed Use of Section 163 BNSS (Earlier 144 CrPC)
District Magistrates continue to issue Section 163 orders prohibiting the use of nylon/plastic/chinese kite strings, and the police are invoking Section 223 of the BNS (earlier 188 IPC) for violations. However, such orders automatically expire within two months unless extended and are punishable only by a maximum of one year and/or ?5,000 fine, making the offence bailable and weak in deterrence. It also require a complaint by the public servant issuing the order for prosecution or someone superior in authority, not the police acting suomoto becoming complainant itself.
Despite this, the police routinely register FIRs and act as complainants themselves, which is procedurally illegal and violates the mandate of law. The offenders often walk free on bail and repeat the same offence, emboldened by the lack of effective prosecution.
The Real Deterrence Lies Elsewhere
What is needed is not redundant Section 163 orders but strict enforcement under stronger laws already available like Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 providing Imprisonment up to five years and/or ?1 lakh fine;Section 26 of the NGT Act, 2010 – Imprisonment up to three years and/or ?10 crore fine for non-compliance with NGT orders;Relevant sections of Wild Life Protection and Cruelty to Animals Acts.
Prosecution under these laws would ensure serious legal consequences, act as real deterrents, and ensure that offenders like manufacturers, suppliers, and users, are dealt with appropriately.
Beyond “Chinese Manjha” – The Bigger Blind Spot
The enforcement mechanism is also deeply flawed in its obsession with so-called “Chinese Manjha”, while equally dangerous local variants are allowed to circulate unchecked. These include Threads with extremely high tensile strength,Locally made threads coated with glass or metal powder,Synthetic plastic/nylon threads, not labeled “Chinese” but just as fatal.
Authorities must stop chasing names and start addressing the materials used. The lethal potential lies not in name, but in composition.
Fixing Accountability: Responsibility Cannot Remain Faceless
It is imperative that accountability be fixed on the officers and authorities in whose jurisdiction such fatal incidents involving banned synthetic kite strings occur. Despite the availability of statutory provisions, binding court orders, and administrative directives, if such materials continue to be manufactured, sold, or used openly under the nose of the enforcement machinery, then the responsibility squarely lies with the District Magistrate, the concerned SHO, and the local enforcement units.
Administrative officers cannot be allowed to hide behind symbolic orders or post-incident condemnations, when in fact they have failed in their statutory duty to monitor, enforce, and prevent such public safety threats. The loss of life or serious injury caused by a banned substance is not merely a result of the offender’s act but also a consequence of institutional inaction and enforcement failure.
The era of faceless governance and consequence-free administration must end. Accountability, both legal and administrative, is key to ensuring deterrence not just for violators on the street but also for those in positions of authority.
Need for National Grading Standards
There is a complete lack of regulatory clarity regarding what kind of kite string is safe and permissible. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), in its report dated 10-02-2017 to the NGT, stated that it is not the competent authority to decide acceptable grades of kite strings and recommended that this responsibility be assigned to the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS).
To this date, no grading framework exists. The absence of defined parameters has allowed violators to exploit loopholes, market dangerous threads under false names, and continue endangering public lives and biodiversity.
Conclusion: What Needs to Be Done
Immediate, strict and universal enforcement of NGT judgment
Prosecution understringent environmental and wildlife laws instead of mild penal provisions;
Holding authorities responsible for enforcement failure
Regulatory intervention by BIS to define acceptable grades of kite flying threads;
Awareness campaigns and enforcement drives to curb the use of deadly materials.
Until these steps are implemented, lives will continue to be lost, not due to the act of kite flying, but due to the string of negligence that binds our administrative and enforcement systems.
The author is Advocate, HC of J&K and Ladakh, Convener, Research and Advocacy Group (RAAG)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
