Experts say people blatantly ignoring safety in the name of tradition, leading to loss of life and serious injuries to govindas in city this year
This year’s Dahi Handi celebrations were marred with 29 injuries that required hospitalisation. PIC/RANE ASHISH
This year’s Govinda celebrations were marred by tragedy, with 278 injuries — minor and serious — reported in Mumbai and its suburbs, of which 29 required hospitalisation, six sustained serious injuries and two people died (not due to fall from human pyramid), as per 24 hours BMC data between 8 am on Saturday and 8 am on Sunday.
What began as a spirited cultural event ended as a grim reminder of the consequences of neglecting safety in the name of tradition. Despite clear directives from the Supreme Court and High Court —mandating age and height restrictions to protect participants — lives were once again lost.
Legal professionals have expressed deep concern over the blatant disregard for these judicial safeguards, which were established through painful past experiences.
Advocate Mohini Priya
Mohini Priya, advocate on record, Supreme Court of India, said the SC’s 2016 orders, affirming the Bombay High Court’s directions, imposed critical restrictions on Dahi Handi, including a 20-foot pyramid height cap, an age limit of 18 years, mandatory safety gear like helmets and mats, and organiser accountability. These measures were rooted in Article 21 of the Constitution, emphasising that cultural celebrations must never compromise human life or bodily integrity.
In 2017, the Bombay High Court modified some restrictions. The age limit was lowered to 14 and the height cap was removed — but only on the basis of the State of Maharashtra’s solemn undertakings. These included mandatory insurance, safety nets, on-site medical teams, and real-time monitoring through drones and CCTV cameras. These conditions are binding under Article 141 of the constitution, and any breach amounts to contempt of court, said Mohini Priya.
Despite a clear legal framework, the state often defaults to ex-gratia payments following accidents, especially involving minors. As affirmed in Nilabati Behera Vs State of Orissa (1993), compensation for rights violations signals State liability — it cannot replace enforcement or justice. When deaths recur annually despite judicial directions, such payments become ritualistic, reducing Article 21 to a reactive measure rather than a guarantee of dignity and safety, Mohini Priya said.
A structured compensation scheme linked to age and injury severity, criminal liability under BNS Sections 106 and 125 for negligent organisers, and state accountability are necessary. Judicial oversight, nodal officers for safety certification, and annual compliance reporting are essential to prevent future tragedies, she added.
Tragedy and exploitation
Advocate Godfrey Pimenta
“What began as a vibrant cultural tradition has become a grim reminder of what happens when safety is sacrificed for custom. Political actors have exploited this event, turning it into a contest for attention, inflating prize money as elections approach, and pushing human pyramids to dangerous heights of ten levels,” said Advocate Godfrey Pimenta of Watchdog foundation.
Solicitor Stuti Galiya
“Courts rely on reasoned arguments, but mass sentiment is driven by emotions, identity, and community pressure, making legal enforcement very difficult. Any order touching religion, cultural practices, or deep-rooted beliefs becomes a flashpoint for unrest. Social media accelerates outrage, turning legal disputes into mass movements within hours. Courts often pass strong judgments, but implementation depends on state administrative authorities — police, municipal bodies, local administration — who frequently delay, dilute, or ignore directives,” said Solicitor Stuti Galiya.
According to Galiya, this creates frustration among law-abiding citizens. “Lawlessness rises when court orders lack universal acceptance, political backing, administrative will, and timely enforcement. Without visible penalties, compliance becomes optional, and defiance normalises — from small civic rules to major constitutional principles,” she said.
Advocate Dhanpal Jain
“Stop turning celebration into sacrifice — human lives are not entertainment. Every year, the reckless spectacle of tall Dahi Handis maims or kills young boys, often minors, in blatant violation of the law and basic human rights. The Supreme Court has set clear limits — no minors, no pyramids above 20 feet — yet organisers continue to defy these directives. This is not culture; it is criminal negligence,” said Advocate Dhanpal Jain, who has been vocal about any form of exploitation.
SC’s 2016 order
• No minors below 18 to be part of human pyramids
• No pyramids over 20 feet
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
