Barricades cannot silence the voice of democracy

Why in the News

Prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) covered the whole of New Delhi district ahead of a protest at Jantar Mantar demanding the Chief Election Commissioner’s resignation. Metro stations were shut and the Delhi Police made mass detentions. Protest is being first relocated, then confined and finally banned, shrinking a right the Supreme Court has recognised as fundamental.

What is the right to protest, and how can it be restricted?

1. What it is: Peaceful protest rests on freedom of speech and the right to assemble peacefully and without arms under Article 19(1)(b). It works like a petition delivered in person to those in power.
2. Reasonable restrictions: Under Article 19(3), the State may restrict assembly in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order.
3. Judicial recognition: The Ramlila Maidan case (2012) and Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018) upheld peaceful protest as a fundamental right. The later ruling directed guidelines for regulated demonstrations at Jantar Mantar.
4. Prohibitory orders: Section 163 of the BNSS, which replaced Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), lets authorities ban gatherings to prevent an apprehended danger to peace.
5. The takeaway: When restrictions meant to regulate demonstrations prevent them altogether, the right survives on paper but not on the street.

How has Delhi’s protest geography shrunk?

1. Boat Club to Jantar Mantar: The Boat Club was once Delhi’s designated site for demonstrations, before they were shifted to Jantar Mantar.
2. Lost rally routes: Until the COVID-19 lockdown, rallies ran from Mandi House or Ramlila Maidan to Parliament Street, where people expressed dissent before their elected representatives.
3. Permissions dried up: Since the lockdown, barring a few exceptions, almost no permissions have been granted, and Jantar Mantar is routinely blocked on the plea of “permission denied”.
4. More barricades: Barricading rose after the NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test) protests of 20 July. The Delhi Police reportedly require protest applications 10 days in advance.

Is this a Delhi problem or a national pattern?

1. Bengaluru: Protests moved from Town Hall to Freedom Park, where the Karnataka High Court confined them in 2022. The park closed in December 2025 for “redevelopment”, with power and water cut.
2. Hyderabad: Protests are permitted only at Dharna Chowk.
3. Farmers’ march: Farmers marching to Delhi in early 2024 met barricades, barbed wire, tear gas and trenches on the Haryana border.
4. Standard State responses: Preventive detentions, prohibitory orders against strikes and student marches, and Internet shutdowns have become standard responses across States. The column holds the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) responsible for this pattern.

Why does the column call the restrictions self-defeating, and part of a wider fight?

1. Displaced protest: When the state seals the formal public sphere, protest moves to borders, highways, campuses and digital networks. Eg. Shaheen Bagh sit-in against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA).
2. Fear of exclusion: The column argues the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls threatens mass deletion of the poor, migrants, minorities and women. It cites ECI data showing short-term migrants and married women at risk of deletion.
3. Appointments law: The column objects to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. It says the Act removed the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel and gives Commissioners lifelong immunity from prosecution.

Challenges

1. Competing rights: Indefinite occupation of public roads burdens commuters. Eg. Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020), the Shaheen Bagh case.
2. Blanket orders: Repeated, standing Section 163 orders replace a case by case assessment of danger with a permanent ban.
3. Unchecked discretion: Police discretion to refuse permission for protests against the government has no published criteria.
4. Advance notice: Long notice periods rule out timely protest against sudden events.

Way Forward

1. Restore designated sites: Reopen Jantar Mantar and Parliament Street to regulated assembly under the 2018 guidelines.
2. Reasoned, time bound orders: Issue Section 163 orders only against specific threats, with written reasons and a fixed duration.
3. Transparent permissions: Publish criteria and deadlines for protest permissions, with an appeal to a magistrate against refusal.
4. A site in every city: Keep an accessible protest site with water and power in each major city.

Conclusion

The right to assemble survives in law but is being narrowed in practice through site closures, permission rules and standing prohibitory orders. Whether courts test blanket orders against the guidelines they set for Jantar Mantar will decide whether regulation of protest stays regulation and not a ban.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2026] X’ was addressing a seminar on the meaning of the term ‘law’ as provided under Article 13, Part III of the Constitution of India. ‘X’ explained that the meaning of the term ‘law’ in the Constitution of India was very comprehensive. It included ordinances, orders and even rules and regulations. ‘Y’ pointed out that the term ‘law’ in Article 13 also included custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law, to which ‘X’ was not convinced. Based on the above, select the correct conclusion from the options given below: (a) X is correct in the interpretation of law, including the view on non-inclusion of custom (b) The view of Y that ‘law’ included custom is not correct (c) The views of both X and Y are correct (d) The view of only Y is correct ANSWER: D”