[ad_1]
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court as we speak mentioned there’s a must stability the correct to protest and blocking of roads and that there can not a “universal policy” because the scenario could “vary” from case-to-case.
The prime court docket’s remark got here because it reserved the decision on a batch of pleas towards the anti-CAA protests which had led to blocking of a highway in Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh final December.
The scenario normalised later because of the coronavirus pandemic and subsequent observance of protocol.
“There were some supervening circumstances which came into play. God almighty had intervened,” mentioned a bench comprising Justices SK Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari.
Taking observe of the submissions of attorneys, the bench mentioned: “We have to balance the right to protest and blocking of roads. We have to deal with the issue. There cannot be a universal policy as the situation may vary on case to case basis.
“In a parliamentary democracy, protests can occur in parliament and on roads. But on roads, it must be peaceable”.
Amit Sahni, one of the lawyers who had filed the plea in the case, said that this kind of protests should not have been allowed in larger public interest.
“This was allowed to proceed for greater than 100 days and folks confronted difficulties. This sort of incident shouldn’t have occurred. Yesterday in Haryana a “Chakka Jam” was organised. They have additionally referred to as for a “Bharat Bandh” on September 24-25,” he said.
Advocate Mehmood Pracha, appearing for an intervenor, said that there was a right to peaceful protest and some members of a political party went to the spot and “created” the riots.
“We have the correct to protest. State equipment just isn’t sacrosanct. Members of a political social gathering went there with the police and created the scenario,” he said.
Reserving the verdict, the bench said that it had appointed interlocutors as an experiment and they had suggested some measures which can be looked into.
It said that the experiment of sending interlocutors may or may not have succeeded and the COVID-19 situation may also have an effect on the situation.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said that the right to protest cannot be absolute and there are some judgements to this affect.
The top court had earlier heard the pleas, filed by Mr Sahni, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg and Ashutosh Dubey, against the anti-CAA protests at Shaheen Bagh after the February 8 Delhi assembly elections.
Amit Sahni had approached the high court seeking directions to Delhi Police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which was blocked by anti-CAA protesters since December 15.
The high court had urged local authorities to deal with the situation keeping in mind the law and order situation.
Amit Sahni has filed a special leave petition in the top court against the high court’s order.
The plea has sought directions to the police to ensure smooth traffic flow on Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch.
It has sought supervision of the situation in Shaheen Bagh, where several women were protesting, by a retired Supreme Court judge or a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court in order to circumvent any violence.
Separately, Mr Garg had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking directions to authorities to remove the protestors from Shaheen Bagh.
Restrictions had been imposed on the Kaindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and the Okhla underpass, which were closed on December 15 last year due to the protests against CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Mr Garg’s plea said that various other arterial roads of Delhi have been facing traffic congestion due to the protest at Shaheen Bagh.
Saying that the law enforcement machinery has been “held hostage to the whims and fancies of the protesters,” the plea has sought laying down of guidelines for protests leading to obstruction of public places.
“It is disappointing that the state equipment is muted and a silent spectator to hooliganism and vandalism of the protesters who’re threatening the existential efficacy of the democracy and the rule of legislation and had already taken the legislation and order scenario in their very own hand,” the plea said.
It said the Shaheen Bagh protest is “undoubtedly inside the constitutional parameter” but it lost its legality as constitutional protection were being “blatantly and openly flouted and violated”.
The state has a duty to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens, who have been facing trouble due to the road blockade, it said.
“Hence, it’s urgently required that public locations should not be allowed to be abused and misused for ulterior and mala fide functions equivalent to staging protest towards the constitutional modification within the coronary heart of the capital metropolis and thereby inflicting incalculable hardships and difficulties to the widespread folks,” it mentioned.
[ad_2]
Source hyperlink