Back
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, D. V. S. S. SOMAYAJULU
Kaka Ramakrishna, S/o. K. Peravalaiah – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, A. P. Secretariat – Respondent
ORDER :
This Court has heard Sri Raju Ramachandran, Learned senior counsel, Sri Siddharth Luthra, Learned Senior Counsel, Sri T. Sreedhar, Learned Senior Counsel, Sri Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, Learned Senior Counsel and Sri Javvaji Sarath Chandra, learned counsel in this batch of matters. This Court has heard the learned Advocate General for the respondents.
2. The challenge in all these matters is to G.O.Rt.No.1, Home (Legal.II) Department, dated 02.01.2023, by which the Government of Andhra Pradesh sought to regulate public meetings/assembly on roads, road sides and margins. Directions were issued under the Police Act, 1961 in this G.O. All the writ petitioners have challenged the said G.O.
3. Sri Raju Ramachandran, learned senior counsel, took the lead in arguing the matters. He made his submissions in W.P.(PIL) No.5 of 2023. According to him Right to Free Speech is a Fundamental Right, which cannot be totally curtailed and can only be subject to reasonable restrictions as per the provisions contained in Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Learned senior counsel submits that the effect of this G.O. is to virtually ban the public meetings on roads, road margins etc. He states t
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the refusal of permission to hold a public meeting was upheld based on the need to preserve public order and the strain on police manpower due....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to balance the right to hold peaceful assembly with the right of the public to carry on with normal life and activities, and the impositio....
The police authorities can only regulate the conduct of public meetings and assemblies under the Police Act, 1861.
The court reinforced the importance of freedom of speech and assembly, ruling that authorities must provide valid justifications for denying permission to hold public meetings, as such rights are fun....
Art. 19(1)(b) of the Constitution guarantees the fundamental right of every citizen to hold peaceful assembly or processions, the same is not an absolute right.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
