SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Cal) 612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
DEBASISH KAR GUPTA, SHAMPA SARKAR, JJ.
Md. Amin & Others - Petitioners
Versus
Bharatiya Janata Party & Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 19370 (W) of 2018
Decided On : 26-09-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Idrish Ali, Ibrahim Ali, Prasun Ghosh, S. Biswas, Madhu Jana, Goutam Sardar, Brajesh Jha, Arijit Bakshim, Shambhu Nath Roy, Anirban Mitra, Kishore Dutta, LD. Advocate General, Ashis Sanyal, LD. Sr. Advocate, Kaushik Chanda, LD. Addl. Solicitor General.

The right to peaceful protest and assembly under Article 19 of the Constitution of India must be exercised in a manner that does not lead to violence or disrupt law and order.

Headnote:

Bandh - Public Interest Litigation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Entry 2, List II, of 7th Schedule to the Constitution of India - Article 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 19(1)(c), 19(1)(d) - Anita Thakur & Ors. vs. Government of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. (2016) 15 SCC 525 - Bimal Gurung & Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) & Ors. AIR 2018 SC 1459

Fact of the Case:

The writ application is filed as a Public Interest Litigation to ensure smooth functioning of routine affairs during a 12-hour 'Bandh' called by the Bharatiya Janata Party in the State of West Bengal. The petitioners seek directions to the State and Central Governments to protect the fundamental rights of citizens to move freely and discharge their functions.

Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledges the right to peaceful protest and assembly under Article 19 of the Constitution of India but emphasizes that such rights should not lead to violence or disrupt law and order. The court directs the State and Central authorities to ensure the smooth functioning of essential services, prevent intimidation or interference with citizens' movement, and take action against those engaging in violence and vandalism.

Issues: The main issue is the balance between the fundamental rights of citizens to protest and the maintenance of law and order during a 'Bandh'.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relies on the provisions of Article 19 of the Constitution of India and previous decisions to emphasize the right to peaceful protest and assembly, while cautioning against actions that lead to violence and disrupt law and order.

Final Decision: The court grants leave to correct a typographical error, keeps affidavits of service on record, and issues directions to the State and Central authorities to ensure the smooth functioning of essential services and prevent intimidation or interference with citizens' movement during the 'Bandh'. The writ application is disposed of with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

1. On the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners, leave is granted to correct the typographical error in the cause title so far as the description of the respondent No.2 is concerned.

2. Let affidavits of service filed on behalf of the petitioners be kept on record.

3. This is an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ application is filed by three writ petitioners. One of them, namely the petitioner No.1 identifies himself as a social worker and the petitioner No.2 identifies himself as a member of All India Minority Forum and the petitioner No.3 identifies herself as a small businesswoman. This writ application is filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation.

4. The subject matter involved in this writ application is a call of "Bandh" of 12 hours today, i.e., on September 26, 2018 from 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. at the instance of the respondent No.1, i.e. Bharatiya Janata Party in the State of West Bengal. The main prayer made in this writ application is to ensure smooth functioning of the routine affairs in the State during the aforesaid period of "Bandh" by directing the State-respondents to ensure smooth functioning of all organisations and institutions in the State and to prevent any sort of untoward incident at the instance of any miscreant.

5. It is submitted by Mr. Idrish Ali, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, according to the settled principles of law, that fundamental rights of the people as a whole cannot be subservient to the claim of fundamental right of an individual or only a section of people. Therefore, nobody canrestrain a citizen of an independent country to enjoy his fundamental right to move freely and to discharge his function in accordance with law. It is also submitted by Mr. Ali that it is the responsibility of the State machinery as also the Central machinery to ensure such fundamental right of the citizens of India. A prayer is made by Mr. Ali to give necessary directions upon the administration, namely the Central Government and the State Government to take all necessary measures for ensuring the enjoyment of the aforesaid fundamental rights by the citizens of India during the period for which the "Bandh" has been called by the respondent No.1.

6. It is submitted by Mr. Ashis Sanyal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1, that the right of a citizen or an organisation to express himself or themselves freely is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. In his usual fairness, he further submits that it does not include forcefully restraining a citizen of a country from expressing his free opinion or to act on his volition. According to Mr. Sanyal, the right to support a call of "Bandh" by a citizen on his own volition is not against any fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India. It is submitted by Mr. Sanyal, on instruction, that the respondent No.1 has given a call for "Bandh" in the State of West Bengal today for 12 hours from 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. relying upon the volition of the citizen of the State and not by applying any force to compel them to support such a call of "Bandh".

7. It is submitted by the respondent No.2, namely Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh, on instruction, that the respondent No.2 has not called any "Bandh" today. The allegation made in the writ application to that effect is baseless. According to him, it is the fundamental right of a citizen of India either to support or oppose a call of "Bandh" peacefully. But the respondent No.2 has not taken any decision in this regard as an organisation.

8. It is submitted by Mr. Kishore Dutta, learned Advocate General, State of West Bengal, on instruction, that the State Government has already taken a decision to ensure smooth functioning of all affairs of the State today from 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. taking into consideration the call of "Bandh" by the respondent No.1. According to him, all measures have been tak


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top