Traffic on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch was blocked by anti-CAA protesters since December 15 (Archive)
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court said today that it is necessary to balance the right to protest and the blocking of roads and that there can be no “universal policy”, as the situation can “vary” from one case to another.
The high court observation came when the verdict was reserved on a series of allegations against protests against the CAA that had led to the blocking of a road at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi last December.
The situation was later normalized by the coronavirus pandemic and the subsequent observance of the protocol.
“There were some supervening circumstances that came into play. Almighty God had intervened,” said a bench made up of judges SK Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari.
Taking note of the lawyers’ submissions, the court said: “We have to balance the right to protest and the roadblock. We have to address the problem. There can be no one universal policy, as the situation can vary from case to case. other. .
“In a parliamentary democracy, protests can happen in parliament and on the roads. But on the roads, it has to be peaceful.”
Amit Sahni, one of the lawyers who had pleaded guilty in the case, said such protests should not have been allowed in the broader public interest.
“This was allowed to continue for more than 100 days and people faced difficulties. This kind of incident should not have happened. Yesterday in Haryana a ‘Chakka Jam’ was organized. They have also called for a ‘Bharat Bandh’ on September 24- 25, “he said.
Lawyer Mehmood Pracha, who appeared as auditor, said there was a right to peaceful protest and some members of a political party came to the scene and “created” the unrest.
“We have the right to protest. The machinery of the state is not sacrosanct. Members of a political party went there with the police and created the situation,” he said.
In reserving the verdict, the court said it had designated the interlocutors as an experiment and had suggested some measures that can be examined.
He said that the experiment of sending interlocutors may or may not have been successful and that the COVID-19 situation may also have an effect on the situation.
Attorney General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Center, said that the right to protest cannot be absolute and there are some lawsuits in this regard.
The high court had previously heard the motives, presented by Sahni, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg and Ashutosh Dubey, against the protests against the CAA in Shaheen Bagh after the February 8 assembly elections in Delhi.
Amit Sahni had approached the high court seeking directions from Delhi police to ensure a smooth flow of traffic on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which has been blocked by anti-CAA protesters since December 15.
The higher court had urged the local authorities to address the situation taking into account the public order situation.
Amit Sahni has filed a special license petition in the superior court against the superior court order.
The statement requested instructions from the police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch.
He has requested 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 to prevent any kind of violence.
Furthermore, Mr. Garg had filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking the authorities for instructions to remove the protesters 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 protests against CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Garg’s plea said that other arterial roads in Delhi have faced traffic congestion due to the protest in Shaheen Bagh.
By saying that the law enforcement machinery has been “hostage to the whims and fantasies of protesters,” the petition has sought to establish guidelines for protests that lead to the obstruction of public places.
“It is disappointing that the state machinery is silenced and is a silent bystander to the vandalism and vandalism of the protesters who are threatening the existential efficacy of democracy and the rule of law and had already taken the situation of law and order in their hands. own hands, “he added. said the plea.
He said the Shaheen Bagh protest is “undoubtedly within constitutional standards” but lost its legality as constitutional protection was being “openly and blatantly mocked and violated”.
The state has a duty to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens, who have faced problems due to the road blockade, he said.
“Therefore, it is urgently required that the abuse and misuse of public places for ulterior ends and in bad faith, such as organizing a protest against the constitutional amendment in the heart of the capital city and thus causing incalculable hardships and difficulties to the population.
.
