Delhi’s air pollution has entered another dangerous phase, with the city’s average air quality index reaching 350 by 4 pm on Tuesday and the contribution of crop burning to PM2.5 expected to rise over the next two days. The deterioration shows how Delhi’s air quality is shaped not only by emissions within the city, but also by regional agricultural activity and weather conditions that can trap pollutants close to the ground.
The Central Pollution Control Board recorded the citywide AQI at 350, placing it in the “very poor” category cited in the report. Conditions were substantially worse at some locations. Jahangirpuri recorded an AQI of 452, categorised as “severe”, while 10 monitoring stations reported readings above 400. The data indicates that the citywide average concealed much sharper local exposure in some neighbourhoods.
Delhi’s worsening air is part of a rapid deterioration over three consecutive days. The average AQI stood at 261 on 1 November, rose to 324 on 2 November and reached 350 on 3 November. The report also notes that the current reading was below the year’s earlier peak of 378, recorded on 20 January, but the immediate direction of travel remained negative.
That movement matters because an average citywide number does not describe the experience of every resident equally. People living near high-emission corridors, industrial areas, construction activity or locations with consistently poor monitoring readings may face substantially worse conditions than the citywide figure suggests. The Jahangirpuri reading is an example of this uneven exposure, although the supplied report does not establish the specific local causes behind that station’s higher reading.
The immediate forecast points to a further increase in the share of PM2.5 attributed to crop burning. According to the report, the contribution was estimated at 8.583 per cent on 2 November and rose to 15.301 per cent on 3 November. The forecast places it at 20.057 per cent on 4 November and 22.207 per cent on 5 November.
These figures do not mean that crop burning is the sole source of Delhi’s pollution. They describe its estimated share of PM2.5 under the decision support system cited by the report. The distinction is important because Delhi’s pollution problem is produced by multiple sources, while the relative contribution of each source changes with weather, wind direction and the timing of emissions.
The report also describes a contradiction that has shaped the debate around northern India’s winter pollution. Satellite data cited in the article shows that the number of farm-fire incidents has declined compared with earlier years. Yet the contribution of crop burning to Delhi’s PM2.5 is forecast to rise during the next few days. A lower number of fires, therefore, does not automatically translate into clean air in the capital. The location, timing and atmospheric movement of emissions also influence the pollution reaching the city.
Between 15 September and 2 November this year, 3,535 farm-fire incidents were recorded across the states and Union territories covered in the report. Punjab accounted for the largest share, with 1,612 cases, followed by Rajasthan with 738, Madhya Pradesh with 614, Uttar Pradesh with 349, Uttarakhand with 176, Haryana with 44 and Delhi with two.
The longer-term comparison shows a substantial decline in reported fire incidents. During the same period in 2020, the figure was 51,822. It fell to 24,583 in 2021 and stood at 26,490 in 2022. The report records 4,993 incidents in 2025 and 3,535 in the current year up to 2 November. However, these comparisons must be read alongside the current pollution readings: fewer fires have not prevented Delhi from recording very poor and severe air quality in specific locations.
This is the central institutional challenge in Delhi’s air-pollution system. The city experiences the health and mobility consequences of a regional problem, but the causes are distributed across several jurisdictions. Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana and Delhi appear in the incident data, while Delhi’s residents experience the combined effect through the capital’s air. Responsibility for prevention, enforcement, farm management, transport emissions and local pollution control is consequently divided among different administrations and agencies.
The supplied report does not identify a single policy or agency responsible for the projected rise in crop-burning contribution. It does, however, show why annual pollution responses cannot rely only on emergency measures within Delhi. City-level restrictions or enforcement may address local sources, but they cannot by themselves control emissions originating outside the capital’s boundaries. Regional coordination becomes particularly important when wind carries pollution towards Delhi and atmospheric conditions limit dispersion.
Weather is expected to intensify the problem during the current week. The India Meteorological Department has warned of morning fog or haze in Delhi and the National Capital Region through 9 November. Wind speeds are expected to remain low during the morning and evening, while the wind direction is forecast to remain northwesterly until 6 November. These conditions can reduce the movement of pollutants away from the city and contribute to their accumulation near the surface.
The weather forecast also illustrates why the same quantity of emissions can produce different air-quality outcomes on different days. When winds are stronger or atmospheric mixing is better, pollutants may disperse more effectively. When winds are slow and the air remains stable, emissions can remain concentrated over the urban region. The report links the current deterioration to this combination of emissions and weather, rather than presenting crop burning alone as the explanation.
Diwali fireworks are identified in the report as another factor that could worsen air quality. The article does not provide a quantified estimate of their expected contribution, and the effect would depend on the timing and scale of fireworks as well as prevailing weather conditions. Their mention nevertheless adds to the wider picture of a city entering a period when multiple pollution sources can coincide with poor dispersion.
Delhi’s monitoring network is therefore not simply recording a seasonal inconvenience. It is documenting a recurring governance problem in which pollution levels rise rapidly, local exposure varies sharply and the source mix changes from day to day. The difference between the citywide AQI of 350 and Jahangirpuri’s reading of 452 demonstrates why neighbourhood-level data matters for public communication and administrative response.
The evidence supplied here confirms three facts. Delhi’s air quality deteriorated from 261 to 350 between 1 and 3 November; several monitoring locations crossed the severe threshold, including Jahangirpuri at 452; and the estimated contribution of crop burning to PM2.5 is expected to rise through 5 November even though recorded farm-fire incidents are lower than in previous years. What remains unresolved in the supplied material is how much each local and regional source contributes to the city’s total pollution at individual locations.
The next developments to monitor are the AQI readings through the week, the anticipated change in crop-burning contribution, the effect of northwesterly winds and low wind speeds, and whether morning haze continues across Delhi and the NCR through 9 November. Those indicators will show whether the current deterioration is a short-lived spike or another sustained period of hazardous urban air.
