Recently the Supreme Court has expressed objection with regard to the farmers’ protests which further lead people to doubt the extent and scope of right to protest under article 19. There’s clearly a differentiation between the right to protest which is a democratic right and causing inconvenience to the people as ruled by a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari. They also highlighted that right to protest is albeit a constitutional right but it can’t foster agitation and violence in the society. For example, petitions challenging the validity of CAA are still pending but it doesn’t prevent protesting against its implementation. They also emphasized that hindering traffic and public movements are signs of protesting against the oppressive colonial rulers not in healthy democratic country where discussions and deliberations can reach a solution. In the concluding judgment, the court ruled that right to protest under article 19 must be there to respect the truest form of democracy and observed that 

“This Court will not interfere with the protest in question. Indeed the right to protest is part of a fundamental right and can as a matter of fact, be exercised subject to public order. There can certainly be no impediment in the exercise of such rights as long as it is non-violent and does not result in damage to the life and properties of other citizens and is in accordance with law. We are of the view at this stage that the farmers’ protest should be allowed to continue without impediment…”

Picture Credits: Ipleaders

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s