IMPORTANT POINTS
Laws declared by Supreme Court are law of the land under Article 141 and their compliance is required to be ensured.
Disturbance created by the police/state officials/people at large violate constitutional guarantee to citizens under Article 21.

Judgment :-

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. –

1. Leave granted

2. This appeal arises out of an order dated 21.05.2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 378 of 2013 which arises out of an order dated 25.02.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2273 of 2013.

3. By impugned order, the Division Bench disposed of the appeal filed by the appellant herein in the light of the assurance given by the State to settle the controversy raised by the appellant in the writ petition/appeal.

4. Dissatisfied with the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.

5. This Court issued notice to the respondents. On being served, learned counsel for the respondents filed counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. In order to appreciate the issue involved in this appeal, it is necessary to mention the facts in brief.

8. The appellant (writ petitioner) is the resident of Jaipur (Rajasthan). He retired as Director General of Police in March 1995. To settle after retirement, the appellant constructed his house in a residential colony opposite to Vidhyut Bhawan in Jyoti Nagar in Jaipur city. The locality and, in particular, the location of the appellant's house is very near to “Vidhan Sabha" (State Assembly Building).

9. The appellant to his misfortune noticed that very frequently, thousand/hundreds of people belonging to political/non-political parties would gather on the road approaching to Vidhan Sabha, which is in front of his house, with agitated mood and would undertake their “Protests March” or "Dharna" or "Procession" for ventilating their grievances. The protestors then would use indiscriminately loudspeakers by erecting temporary stage on the road and go on delivering speeches one after the other throughout the day which sometimes used to continue for indefinite period regardless of time. Since there used to be a gathering of thousand/hundreds of people, the demonstrators would indiscriminately make use of the compound walls of nearby houses including that of the appellant’s house to ease themselves frequently at any time.

10. In order to regulate such events and to maintain law and order situation, the State and Police Administration used to put barricades and depute hundreds of police personnel to see that no untoward incident occurs. These barricades used to be installed just in front of the gates of the houses of the residents including the appellant's house. The police personnel like others would also use the walls of the residential houses including that of the appellant's house to ease and nobody was in a position to tell them not to do such activities in front of their houses. The appellant also noticed that these activities had gained considerable momentum making living of the residents of that area a miserable one because neither they were in a position to stay comfortably and peacefully inside the house or do any work due to constant noise pollution nor were in a position to come out of their house due to constant fear of insecurity and restrictions put by the State.

11. The appellant was one of the most affected persons whose living in his house had become impossible due to these activities and finding no solution to the problem faced, compelled him to first approach the Commissioner of Police and make an oral complaint but finding that no action was taken, filed a written complaint on 21.11.2011 (Annexure P-1).

12. In the complaint, the appellant narrated the aforementioned grievances in detail and requested the Commissioner of Police to take immediate effective remedial steps to prevent such events.

13. Since the Commissioner of Police did not take any action on the complaint, the appellant, on 06.03.2012, filed a complaint before the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), New Delhi under the provisions of the Human