Even the proper to protest is topic to affordable restrictions – SC in reviewing petition towards Shaheen Bagh’s verdict

The Apex Court rejected the petition for review filed against the Shaheen Bagh judgment, in which the court ruled that dissenting views could be expressed through demonstrations and protests, but only in certain locations.

The bank denied the petition, stating that the right to protest cannot exist anywhere, anytime. Anyone who expresses a dissenting opinion must fulfill certain duties or obligations.

The bank found that ongoing protests violated the rights of other citizens and therefore continued occupation of a public place could not be allowed.

The protesters turned to the Supreme Court and requested a joint hearing of the pending review petition and the petition on agricultural law, as observations made during the farm laws seek to challenge the right to protest.

The petitioner argued that the judgment should be reviewed as it is the right of citizens to express a dissenting opinion against government policy.

The petitioners express concern about the legality and extent of the right to protest in public places during the ongoing farmers’ protest. They said there was a conflicting opinion compared to the 2020 ruling.

On December 17, 2020, the Supreme Court held that the farmers’ protest should be allowed without violating the peace by demonstrators or police officers.

The petitioners argued that fundamental rights could not be discriminated against or segregated.

However, the request for review of the Shaheen Bagh judgment and the request to hold a joint hearing with the farmers’ request were rejected by the Apex Court.

Comments are closed.