1 PIL.81.2011(8).sxw mnm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 81 OF 2011 Suryakant Jayavant Lavte ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Datta Mane for Petitioner Mr. V.D. Patil, G.P for Respondent No.1 for State Mr. V.S. Kapse for Respondent No.2 CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. AND MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J. Date : 22 NOVEMBER 2011. P.C. 1. In this Petition, the Petitioner has prayed for directions to constitute an expert committee to study the harmful effects of metal detectors and has also prayed for directions to the Respondents to stop the use of metal detectors at public places like railway stations, theater, shopping malls etc., in the State of Maharashtra till proper policy is formulated and/or express view is received and implemented. 2. The Petitioner has not placed any material on record to show that the persons passing through the metal detector would suffer from any health hazards as alleged in the petition. On the contrary the documents at Exhibit-A and B themselves show that the opinion on this issue is divided. Exhibit-B produced by the Petitioner itself indicates the opinion of a Scientist Joe Reiss, vice-president of marketing for American Science and Engineering that the X-ray dose of one body scan is negligible. One 2 PIL.81.2011(8).sxw scan emits less than 10 microrem, the unit used to measure radiation, he said. Comparably, an hour on an airplane at a high altitude exposes a passenger to 300 microrem, and the average person is exposed to 1,000 microrem of radiation over the course of a normal day, Reiss said. It is further indicated therein that nearly 90 percent of passengers choose the body scan. 3. The Court is required to see the comparative advantage of metal detectors for ensuring security of persons and public property vis a vis the harmful effects of radiation that emanates therefrom. 4. In view of the fact that on the Petitioner’s own showing the harmful effects of radiation is negligible, no case is made out for entertaining the Petition except to direct that the authorities at each public institution may determine the extent of the use of metal detectors for persons availing of regular or frequent use of such access in their discretion as the circumstances warrant. 5. With this observation the Petition is dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE ROSHAN DALVI, J.