The Supreme Court on Monday orally reaffirmed that the right to peaceful and lawful protest is guaranteed under the Constitution, observing that the mere existence of an agitation cannot justify a police lathi-charge or excessive use of force.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana made the remarks while hearing a batch of petitions alleging excessive police action against students protesting examination paper leaks, particularly during the July 20 demonstrations at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.
The petitioners have sought an independent investigation into allegations of police excesses, preservation of CCTV and body-camera footage, compensation for injured protesters, and national guidelines governing police conduct during demonstrations.
During the hearing, the Bench stressed that allegations of police excess must be independently examined and called for uniform protocols for handling protests across the country, while also acknowledging concerns raised on behalf of injured police personnel.
The Court directed that all connected petitions relating to the protests be heard together, signalling closer judicial scrutiny of police response to public demonstrations even as the matter remains pending.
Constitutional Right to Dissent
Hearing the matter, CJI Surya Kant underlined that democratic dissent occupies a central place in India’s constitutional framework and cannot be curtailed merely because citizens choose to protest peacefully. The Bench orally observed, “Right to peaceful, lawful protest [is] absolutely guaranteed under the Constitution.
So long as it is peaceful agitation, merely because there is agitation, there can’t be [police excess]. If there is excess committed, it should be independently examined.” The Chief Justice further remarked that “Merely because there is agitation, doesn’t mean lathi-charge.
Discipline [is] integral to democratic process,” indicating that maintaining public order and protecting constitutional freedoms must go hand in hand. The Court also noted that the issue was not confined to Delhi alone and emphasised the need for uniform national protocols governing police action during public demonstrations so that citizens’ rights are protected consistently across states.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi added another dimension to the discussion by observing that injuries suffered by both police personnel and protesters deserve equal concern, remarking that, “Injury to individual, be it to policemen or [students], is of equal concern.”
The Bench also questioned whether police personnel had been adequately equipped with protective gear, suggesting that better equipment and preparedness could reduce the need for force during crowd-control operations.
Petitions Stem From Jantar Mantar Protest
The observations arose from petitions challenging the police response to the July 20 student protests over alleged examination paper leaks, during which demonstrators marching from Jantar Mantar towards Parliament alleged they were subjected to lathi-charge, tear gas, physical assault and arbitrary detention.
The petitions seek several directions from the Court, including an independent probe into alleged police excesses, registration of FIRs against officials found responsible, preservation of CCTV footage, body-camera recordings and other electronic evidence, compensation for injured protesters, and nationwide guidelines regulating police conduct during demonstrations.
They also call for restrictions on the deployment of plainclothes personnel during crowd-control operations, clearer standard operating procedures for imposing prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and implementation of long-pending police reforms, including independent Police Complaints Authorities.
During the proceedings, the Bench allowed counsel representing families of injured police personnel to participate, reflecting its view that all affected stakeholders deserve a fair hearing. The Court subsequently directed that all connected petitions concerning the alleged police action be heard together.
The matter had earlier been mentioned before the Chief Justice by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who sought urgent listing citing reports of police excesses. While an earlier request for immediate intervention had not been entertained in the absence of a formally instituted petition, the Court agreed to examine the issues once the petitions were properly filed.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The Supreme Court’s observations serve as an important reminder that constitutional rights and public order are not competing values but complementary responsibilities in a healthy democracy. Peaceful protest has long been recognised as an essential means through which citizens express dissent, demand accountability and participate in democratic life. At the same time, ensuring public safety remains a legitimate responsibility of law enforcement agencies.
The Court’s emphasis on independently examining allegations of police excess, while simultaneously acknowledging injuries suffered by police personnel, reflects the importance of fairness, accountability and due process for everyone involved. Calls for uniform protocols, better police training and improved protective equipment also point towards systemic reforms that could reduce confrontation and build greater public trust.
Also read: Delhi Police Orders Takedown of Social Media Posts Targeting PM Modi Amid CJP Protest Probe
