‘No one can occupy a protest site indefinitely’: Supreme Court seeks time limits on demonstrations

The observations came during a hearing on the large-scale protest held at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar last month and a subsequent demonstration at Ramlila Maidan organised by Opposition parties and other groups against the Election Commission of India (ECI).

The government had withdrawn Jantar Mantar’s status as a designated protest venue and identified three alternative locations, including Ramlila Maidan.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said protest sites could not remain occupied permanently, pointing out that other groups also had the right to demonstrate.

“You cannot occupy a site for all time to come. There are other protesters also. Where will farmers or lawyers go? Everyone has a right to protest,” the Chief Justice said.

The bench sought responses from the Centre and other parties on a petition filed by traders’ organisations seeking restrictions on protests during the festival season.

'Protest organisers must take responsibility'

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the court that organisers who called for demonstrations should be held responsible for any consequences arising from their actions.

Referring to the July 20 protest, Mehta said the authorities had granted permission for only one day.

However, he alleged that demonstrators continued occupying the area and subsequently marched towards Parliament.

“Parliament is not just another political building. You cannot march to Parliament. You cannot march to the Supreme Court,” he told the bench.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions concerning several issues linked to the demonstrations, including alleged mass detentions, police brutality, the closure of Metro stations and internet shutdowns.

Traders cite business losses

The bench, which also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, asked the traders’ organisations to make the political parties that organised the anti-Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) protest parties to their petition.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the traders, told the court that around 50 lakh people lived in the areas surrounding the protest site.

He claimed that shops had remained shut and Connaught Place had been deserted during the demonstrations.

The bench said the court could not properly examine the traders’ grievances unless their organisations included all the groups responsible for organising the protests in the proceedings.

The petition by traders’ bodies seeks to prevent demonstrations from disrupting commercial activity during the festive period.

Court hearing multiple petitions over protests

The Supreme Court was also considering petitions concerning the alleged consequences of the demonstrations, including claims of widespread detention, police excesses, Metro station closures and restrictions on internet services.

The proceedings follow an earlier hearing on October 15, when the bench sought responses from the Election Commission and other parties on a petition filed by Congress MP Rahul Gandhi and 12 Opposition leaders.

The Opposition leaders had raised allegations of large-scale voter deletions and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.