Is Jantar Mantar Protest Ban Legally Sustainable?
Delhi Police de-notifies Jantar Mantar as a protest site, shifting venues to Ramlila, Burari, and CBD Ground. Does this violate the Supreme Court ruling?
The decision by the Delhi Police to de-notify Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site has sparked a significant legal debate. Following the move to shift demonstrations to three new venues, questions are being raised regarding whether this action aligns with the landmark Supreme Court ruling that protected the right to peaceful protest at the site.
The Shift to New Venues
According to a recent notice from the Delhi Police, Jantar Mantar has been officially de-notified as a venue for organizing protests and demonstrations in the capital. The authorities have designated three alternative locations for citizens to exercise their right to protest: Ramlila Ground, Burari Ground, and CBD Ground in East Delhi.
This decision follows the recommendations of a committee constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which was tasked with examining alternative venues for public demonstrations. Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar has stated that a revised Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for organizing protests at these three new locations will be issued separately.
The Supreme Court’s Balancing Act
The legal controversy stems from a 2018 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India. At that time, the Court set aside a blanket ban on protests at Jantar Mantar, which had been ordered by the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The Court emphasized that the right to hold peaceful demonstrations is a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.
While the Court acknowledged the discomfort and harassment faced by local residents due to the nature of the protests, it ruled that the rights of protesters and residents must be balanced rather than one being completely extinguished.
Key Principles of the 2018 Ruling:
- No Total Extinction: The Court held that "Total extinction is not balancing." Instead, regulation should involve curtailing one right to a degree to protect the other.
- Regulation over Prohibition: The Court attributed previous issues at Jantar Mantar to inadequate regulation by authorities rather than the protests themselves.
- Limited Use: The Court directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to devise a mechanism for the limited use of the area, specifically suggesting that small groups be permitted to hold meetings.
- Prior Permission: Authorities were empowered to require prior permission and set parameters for granting such permissions to ensure minimal disturbance to residents and offices.
A Legal Question of Regulation vs. Extinction
The Supreme Court reiterated this position in a 2019 judgment, reinforcing the need to balance the interests of residents with the constitutional rights of protesters. The current move by the Delhi Police to remove Jantar Mantar from the list of designated venues entirely raises a critical legal question: Does de-notifying the site altogether constitute permissible regulation, or does it cross the line into extinguishing a fundamental right?
As the city adjusts to the new protest zones at Ramlila, Burari, and CBD Ground, the legal sustainability of this de-notification remains a point of intense scrutiny for legal experts and civil rights advocates alike.