The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the traders’ bodies, who have alleged that the protests against the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar have adversely impacted their business, to implead the stir organisers as parties to their plea.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions concerning the protests, including those about the alleged police action, surveillance at designated protest sites and the right to protest.
Protests Disrupted Businesses Across Delhi During Festive Season: Traders
The apex court directed the Kirana Committee Delhi to implead the organisers against whom allegations have been made. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the traders’ associations, told the bench that the protests
had disrupted commercial activities across Delhi, particularly during the festive season. He claimed that shops in Connaught Place remained shut and traders were facing considerable financial losses, Live Law reported.
“Our sales are down. If you don’t sell during the festive season, our people are bleeding,” Rohatgi submitted. He warned that continued protests could also affect Diwali sales and urged the Court to explore some “out-of-the-box solutions”. He also requested that protests and dharnas be restricted for the next two months.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi Police, argued that organisers must be held accountable for the impact of such demonstrations. He said permission had been granted for a one-day protest at Jantar Mantar, but protesters occupied the site for 17 days. He added that they had also marched towards Parliament without the necessary permission.
Supreme Court On Right To Protest
The Chief Justice observed that while the right to protest is fundamental, demonstrators cannot occupy designated protest venues indefinitely.
“You can’t occupy a site for all times. Where farmers, journalists, etc. will go? Everyone has right to protest. Designated time must be given for designated period,” the CJI remarked.
He also stressed that permissions for demonstrations should clearly specify their duration and conditions, adding that one group cannot prevent others from exercising their right to protest.
Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy defended Jantar Mantar as a designated protest venue and alleged police excesses, referring to the removal of around 7,000 people. Mehta clarified that they had been removed rather than detained.
