In a strong warning to authorities over “ritualistic” enforcement, the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) has issued sweeping interim directions to curb the illegal manufacture, sale and use of nylon manja, despite an existing ban.
The court said the issue has remained unresolved for years, with action peaking only when incidents hit headlines and fading soon after.
“The approach is episodic, reactive, and ritualistic,” the bench observed, stressing that such lapses directly affect the right to life under Article 21.
Read also:- Supreme Court Questions West Bengal Voter Roll Revision, Seeks Unified Reply from Election Commission
Background of the Case
The matter was heard in Suo-Moto Public Interest Litigation No. 08 of 2020, initiated by the court itself to address the continuing danger posed by nylon manja.
The bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar noted that the PIL has been pending since 2020 and deals with repeated injuries and fatalities caused by the sharp synthetic kite string.
The court considered affidavits filed by the State Government, police authorities and the Municipal Corporation, along with submissions from lawyers and the Amicus Curiae, Mr. Satyajeet S. Bora.
Read also:- Jharkhand High Court Grants Divorce to Wife, Calls Blackmail Using Private Photos ‘Mental Cruelty’
Court’s Observations
The High Court recorded serious dissatisfaction with the way enforcement agencies have handled the ban.
Despite an “unequivocal” prohibition, the court noted nylon manja continues to be freely available and widely used, and the affidavits placed on record were described as repetitive and lacking proof of sustained enforcement.
“The continued failure of governance directly impacts the right to life,” the bench remarked, adding that the harm extends beyond humans and also causes brutal injuries and deaths to birds and other living creatures.
The judges also pointed out that reported incidents are likely only a small portion of the real damage.
“The risk posed by nylon manja is inherent, foreseeable, and well-documented,” the court said, making it clear that the State cannot escape responsibility by only acting against small vendors or users.
One of the sharpest criticisms from the bench was directed at the lack of action against the bigger players in the illegal trade.
Read also:- Supreme Court Grants Four Weeks to Shyuvraj to Pay ₹16 Lakh, Disposes Criminal SLP with Clear Warning
“What is conspicuously absent… is any serious attempt to dismantle the illegal supply chain,” the court observed, noting that there was little evidence of action against manufacturers, bulk suppliers, wholesalers, financiers, or organized networks.
The bench also highlighted how enforcement is incomplete if it ignores online sale.
“In an era dominated by digital commerce, enforcement that ignores the online dimension is plainly ineffective,” the court stated, rejecting any excuse of technological complexity.
To prevent further injuries and loss of life, the court issued a structured set of interim directions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
1. Special Task Force (State-Level)
The Director General of Police (DGP) has been directed to immediately set up a dedicated State-level Special Task Force exclusively for offences involving nylon manja—covering manufacture, storage, transport, sale, online marketing and use.
The Task Force must be headed by an officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police, and must include cyber crime and specialised officers.
Within four weeks, the Task Force must submit an action plan identifying:
- manufacturing units (licensed or illegal),
- supply routes and bulk procurement,
- storage hubs and wholesale points,
- online platforms and social media channels used for sale.
Read also:- Supreme Court Grants Bail to NSCN(IM) Leader Alemla Jamir After Over Six Years in Jail in UAPA Case
2. Intelligence-Based Enforcement
The court directed all Commissioners of Police and Superintendents of Police to ensure continuous surveillance and intelligence-led operations.
The bench underlined that action should focus mainly on the upper tiers of the supply chain, not only end-users.
3. Inter-Departmental Coordination
The State Government has been asked to issue binding coordination directions within two weeks to departments including:
- Home Department
- Urban Development Department
- Information Technology Department
4. Municipal Corporations Must Act Beyond Seizure
Municipal bodies were directed to conduct continuous inspections in markets, shops and godowns.
Where nylon manja is found, authorities must not stop at seizure and must initiate:
- licence cancellation,
- sealing of premises,
- prosecution under law.
5. Online Sale Monitoring and Takedowns
The State must appoint a nodal officer within three weeks, and engage IT professionals to monitor:
- e-commerce platforms,
- social media marketplaces,
- messaging applications.
A mechanism for immediate takedown of nylon manja listings and advertisements must be established. The court warned that intermediaries allowing sale despite notice may face prosecution.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Refuses Arrest Protection to Lawyer Accused of Rape Despite Settlement Claims
6. Continuous Public Awareness
The bench directed sustained public awareness drives, especially before and during festival seasons, to highlight both dangers and penalties.
The court specifically said such efforts must be continuous, not event-driven.
In a significant relief measure, the High Court ordered interim compensation of ₹2,00,000 each to three victims, noting their injuries were a direct result of enforcement failure.
The beneficiaries include:
- Swaransh Sanjiv Jadhav, a minor who suffered grievous neck injuries requiring 20 stitches
- Shoaib Kadri, who suffered injury and underwent 19 stitches
- Mohammad Haidar Ali, a motorcyclist who underwent 9 stitches
The court directed payment within four weeks, after verification, and clarified that it would be without prejudice to their right to claim higher compensation later.
The State was also allowed to recover the amount from guilty persons after adjudication.
Decision and Next Hearing
The PIL will remain pending. The court directed the DGP and concerned Municipal Commissioner to file compliance affidavits within six weeks, supported by verifiable data, and warned that continued non-compliance may lead to fixation of personal accountability of senior officers.
The matter will be listed again after eight weeks.
Case Title: The Registrar (Judicial) High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case No.: Suo-Moto PIL No. 08 of 2020
Decision Date: 09 January 2026
