A plea filed in the Supreme Court says Delhi protest curbs must balance mobility and order. Resident Satish Kumar Aggarwal said demonstrations since October 6 choked key stretches, causing hardship. The plea noted, "The interests of non-participating citizens must be duly considered while determining the appropriate relief in the present proceedings."
A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court opposing a contempt petition against authorities over traffic and transit curbs during protests in Delhi, arguing that the right to assemble cannot override public order and the mobility of commuters.
The application comes as the top court hears contempt proceedings over alleged non-compliance with its directions against the "complete prohibition" of metro and rail services during a Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest. A special Sunday bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana had issued notice to the Centre in the matter.
The intervention plea was filed by Delhi resident Satish Kumar Aggarwal through advocate Anantha Narayana M G. It said that while peaceful dissent is protected under the Constitution, it must be balanced with citizens' right to free movement under Article 19(1)(d) and the right to life under Article 21.
The applicant said demonstrations since October 6 had choked key arterial stretches in Lutyens' Delhi, including Janpath and Parliament Street, causing hardship to office-goers, students and patients. The plea also referred to representations by trader bodies, including the Chamber of Trade and Industry, which wrote to the prime minister saying businesses had seen an estimated 70 per cent slump ahead of festivals such as Diwali and urging the government to create permanent protest zones outside core commercial areas.
"The interests of non-participating citizens, including senior citizens, patients, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, students, employees and persons dependent upon public transportation, must be duly considered while determining the appropriate relief in the present proceedings," the plea said. Citing the Supreme Court's 2018 Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan ruling and the 2012 Ramlila Maidan case, it said the right to protest is subject to reasonable restrictions and that police must retain lawful discretion to prevent chaos.
The main contempt petition, filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, accused Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chairperson D Thara of violating the court's October 9 order. During Sunday's special sitting, the bench directed the Centre to ensure there was no illegal detention of peaceful protesters, uninterrupted internet access and normal Delhi Metro operations. It also ordered the immediate removal of a board outside the court premises imposing Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to safeguard citizens' access to justice. In sum, the case has brought before the court the competing claims of the right to protest, public order and the daily movement of people in the national capital.