No Protest Can Occupy Public Space Indefinitely, Says Supreme Court
CJI Surya Kant stresses that protests must be held at designated locations for a fixed duration, warning that indefinite occupation of public spaces disrupts the lives and livelihoods of ordinary citizens.
The Supreme Court has made an important observation on public protests, stating that no location can be occupied indefinitely in the name of demonstrations. The court emphasised that while everyone has the constitutional right to protest, such activities must take place at designated locations and within a specified time frame.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant observed that no group can claim permanent occupation of a public space merely because it is staging a protest.
“You cannot occupy a place forever. There are other protesters as well. Where will farmers go? Where will lawyers go?” the CJI remarked during the hearing.
The Chief Justice further stated that everyone has the right to protest, but designated protest sites must have clearly defined time limits, which all protesters are required to follow.
Marches Towards Parliament and Supreme Court Not Permitted
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that permission for a protest on July 20 had been granted for only one day. However, the protesters allegedly refused to vacate the site and continued occupying the area.
He also pointed out that the protesters had organised a march towards Parliament.
The Solicitor General argued that Parliament is not merely a political building and that protesters cannot be permitted to march towards such sensitive constitutional institutions. He also maintained that demonstrations or marches towards the Supreme Court should not be allowed.
Responding to the issue, CJI Surya Kant raised concerns about the impact of prolonged protests on ordinary citizens, particularly shopkeepers and street vendors.
“Where will the shopkeepers and street vendors go?” the Chief Justice observed.
He stressed the need to identify suitable locations for demonstrations that would not disrupt the livelihoods of poor traders and small business owners.
The Supreme Court’s observations underline the need to strike a balance between citizens’ fundamental right to peaceful protest and the rights of other people to use public spaces without disruption.
Comments are closed.