Summary
After the Shaheen Bagh blockade had been cleared, the Court disposed of the appeal while explaining the limits of protest on public ways. Speech and peaceful assembly deserve State protection, subject to reasonable restrictions and balancing with others’ rights. Indefinite occupation obstructing commuters was impermissible. The administration must keep public ways clear and exercise its own lawful powers rather than await judicial directions; the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act was not decided.
Issues
- How peaceful protest rights should be balanced against obstruction of public ways.
- What responsibility lay with the administration and the High Court after the challenge to the road blockade.
Provisions considered
- Article 19(1)(a) and (b), read with clauses (2) and (3), Constitution of IndiaAffirmed expression and peaceful assembly rights while recognising reasonable restrictions and balancing with the rights of commuters. (¶¶ 4, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19)
Held
- A pending constitutional challenge to legislation does not itself take away the right to protest. Speech and peaceful assembly are central democratic rights which the State should respect and encourage, subject to constitutionally permissible restrictions and the competing rights of others. (¶¶ 3, 4, 14, 15, 16)
- Public ways and public spaces cannot be occupied in the manner at issue indefinitely. Demonstrations must take place in designated places, and an indeterminate assembly cannot assert an unrestricted choice to block a public way and gravely inconvenience commuters. Reasonable regulation remains distinct from arbitrary exclusion. (¶¶ 17, 19)
- The administration must take suitable action to keep public ways clear of encroachment and obstruction; how it lawfully acts is its responsibility. It should not use court orders as a substitute for its administrative functions. The High Court should have monitored the matter rather than leaving a continuing unresolved situation after disposal. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21)
- The blockade had already been cleared with the onset of the pandemic, so the practical relief had worked itself out. The Court closed the proceedings after stating the governing position. (¶¶ 12, 22, 23)
Result
Civil appeal disposed of with parties bearing their own costs; proceedings closed after clearance of the site and clarification of protest and administrative responsibilities. The separate challenge to the Citizenship Amendment Act remained outside this decision.