Supreme Court seeks INDIA bloc reply on festive-season Delhi protests

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked a traders' body to add INDIA bloc parties as respondents to its petition seeking a halt to protests at Delhi's Ramlila Maidan during the festive season, Press Trust of India reported. The court said protest sites could not be occupied for "all times to come" and stressed the need to balance the right to protest with the right to trade and earn a livelihood.

The court also asked the Congress and its leaders Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi to respond to a female journalist's petition alleging that Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, pushed her during a protest on the Supreme Court premises. It was hearing several petitions concerning the recent protests in the capital, including allegations of mass detention, police brutality, closure of Metro stations and internet shutdowns.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana asked senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the Congress, Gandhi and Kharge, to file replies to the journalist's petition.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Kirana Committee Delhi, told the court that he represented all trading associations in the city. "All shops remain closed, there's nobody in Connaught Place today," he said.

"If you don't sell during the festive season, our sales are down. If you don't sell during the festive season, our people are bleeding. My request is — they must look at some out-of-the-box solutions," Rohatgi said.

Chief Justice Kant said, "You can't occupy a protest site for all times to come. There are other protesters. Where will farmers, journalists, lawyers, etc., go? Where will the trade unions go? Where will the homeless go? Everyone has the right to protest. Designated time must be given for a designated period."

The bench said the right to protest had to be balanced with the right to trade and earn a livelihood, particularly for daily-wage workers. It noted that both the right to protest and the right to conduct business were constitutionally recognised.

"We are not talking about trade merely in terms of commercial establishments. We are talking about the source of livelihood of a daily-wage worker. Where does that person go for his daily bread?" the Chief Justice said.

Rohatgi said businesses had suffered losses running into thousands of crores and sought a two-month restriction on protests, particularly during the festive season.

He said millions of people lived near Ramlila Maidan and several wholesale markets were located within a mile of the site. Around 50 lakh people lived in nearby areas, while shops in places such as Connaught Place remained closed and commercial activity was limited because of the protests, he added.

"The government must now think and come out with a scheme, whether for Delhi or other state capitals. This is no longer merely about Jantar Mantar," Rohatgi said.

Senior advocate N Hariharan said Ramlila Maidan was a designated protest site. "It is a notified site for protests. Jantar Mantar was relocated. Now you have a problem with Ramlila Maidan also. So where should people protest?" he asked.

The bench said, "There may be another request for another protest. There may be one site or two, but everybody has a right to protest. You cannot exclude other people merely because one party has occupied the site. You cannot say that because you have occupied it, you will not allow others."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and Delhi Police, said the Cockroach Janta Party's protest in July had been permitted for only one day, but its members remained at Jantar Mantar for 17 days.

"Then, without obtaining permission, they marched towards Parliament. Parliament is not just a political building. It is a symbol of the sovereignty of India. You cannot be permitted to go to Parliament. You cannot be permitted to go to the Supreme Court and protest without permission," Mehta said.

According to PTI, the court issued notice on the Kirana Committee Delhi's petition seeking a halt to protests during the festive period. It directed the traders' associations to add the organisers of the anti-CEC protests at Ramlila Maidan, including political parties, social organisations or non-governmental organisations, as parties to the case. The court said it could not fully decide the grievances without hearing them.

The court also issued notice on a petition questioning the legal framework for facial recognition surveillance and the use and security of data collected through it.

The bench agreed to hear separately on November 23 a petition concerning the alleged harassment of women journalists and a request for a separate investigative committee. It said the female journalist's petition seeking action against Congress leaders who allegedly pushed her would also be listed that day.

Chief Justice Kant noted that several petitions were being filed on issues already under the court's consideration. He said he was considering directing the Supreme Court registry not to accept such petitions unless an advocate-on-record stated in writing that the issue being raised was different from matters already pending before the court.

The bench said it would hear the group of petitions related to the protests and alleged police brutality under nine broad categories and set a separate hearing date for each category.

On October 15, the bench had sought responses from the Election Commission and others on a petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and 12 Opposition leaders over alleged large-scale voter deletions and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision.

The court will consider the traders' concerns after the protest organisers are added to the case, while the petitions concerning the alleged harassment of women journalists and the journalist's allegations against Congress leaders are scheduled to be heard separately on November 23.

- Ends