* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2680/2011
Dhawandeep Residents Welfare Association (Regd.) ....Petitioner
Through Mr. Sunil Dalal, Advocate.
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. .....Respondents
Through Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, ASG with
Mr. Jayendra, Advocate for UOI.
Mr. N. Waziri, Standing counsel with
Zeenat Masoodi & Shoaib Haider, Advs.
for Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?
ORDER
% 31.05.2011 SANJIV KHANNA, J.
The present public interest litigation writ petition has been filed
by Dhawandeep Residents Welfare Association, representing residents
of the Dhawandeep Building located at the Jantar Mantar Road, New
Delhi. Their grievance is that the respondents, which includes New
Delhi Municipal Council, Commissioner of Police, have miserably failed
WPC 2680/2011 Page 1 of 9
to ensure that the residents of Dhawandeep Building are not
obstructed or prevented from using the road and allowed ingress and
egress to and from their building. It is submitted that the respondents
have failed to ensure cleanliness as processions and dharnas are held
almost throughout the year and the streets get littered and there is
stagnant water and constant sloganeering. It is submitted that some
protesters even put up tents/temporary shelters. These protesters
bathe, sleep, cook near the building for months together creating
unhygienic conditions. Some photographs have been filed by the
petitioners. The following reliefs are prayed for :-
“a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the
Respondents to permanently remove the protestors, their
vehicles and tents from Jantar Mantar Road along with all
their belongings;
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the
Respondents to permanently ban holding dharnas/
processions on Jantar Mantar Road along;
c) Pass such further orders or directions as this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit, appropriate and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the present case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Kerala
Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samiti vs. State of Kerala and Ors., AIR
2004 KERALA 302, in which it has been held as under:-
WPC 2680/2011 Page 2 of 9
“5. The state of affairs as averred in the affidavit filed by
the Government itself shows that Government is not able
to implement it fully and fundamental rights of others are
violated by the demonstrators. Apart from traffic jams,
the demonstrators are creating huge loss to the public.
Citizens right to move about freely and carrying on their
profession etc. is obstructed. In view of the fact that
roads are narrow and on gathering of even 50 peoples
before Secretariat will stop the entire traffic, we are of the
opinion that Government should prohibit conducting of
demonstrations and processions on busy roads like M.G.
Road from Palayam Junction to Thampanur, and other
busy parts of the roads during working days. Imposition of
ban on demonstrations and marches in certain parts of
busy roads on working days in public interest to protect
the fundamental rights of the majority of citizens is
perfectly valid and only a reasonable restriction.
Government is bound to implement the directions given
by the Full Bench of this Court as approved by the Apex
Court. Police shall not allow any procession or
demonstration against the above directions and shall not
permit such demonstrations on working days in busy parts
of the roads like M.G. Road in Thiruvananthapuram
causing traffic block. Petitioners in these cases have filed
representations, marked as Ext. P-1 in the original
petitions. Those representations shall be considered and
disposed of as expeditiously as possible.
All these original petitions are disposed of
accordingly.”
3. In this decision, an earlier decision of Full Bench of Kerala High
Court in Peoples Council for Social Justice v. State of Kerala, 1997(2)
Kerala LT 309, has been quoted. It has been observed in this case that
the right to assemble peacefully and the right to form an association or
union and freedom of speech and expression are valuable fundamental
WPC 2680/2011 Page 3 of 9
rights, but these rights should be exercised without causing injury or
annoyance to others. Authorities have every right to impose
reasonable restrictions as regards processions and street marches. Just
as the participants of these processions and marches have right to use
the highway but the same right is also vested in ordinary citizens and
pedestrians who have equal right to pass and repass along with
highway.
4. The Commissioner of Police has filed counter affidavit today in
Court. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that demonstrations are
permitted in the area subject to certain conditions. Reference is made
to the decision of the Supreme Court in Destruction of Public and
Private Properties vs. State of Andhara Pradesh and Ors.(2009) 5 SCC
212.
5. It is stated that earlier demonstrations were permitted at Boat
Club Lawns , but in late 1980s, there was a demonstration and the
entire Rajpath, Rafi Marg and many other roads had to be closed for
many days. Thus, as an administrative decision, it was decided that
demonstrations would not be allowed at Boat Club and instead Jantar
WPC 2680/2011 Page 4 of 9
Mantar was offered as a place for demonstrations and all political
parties had agreed to the said decision. However, large
demonstrations of more than 8000 people are permitted in Ramlila
Maidan. It is further stated that Delhi Police ensures that the
demonstrations at Parliament Street, start and end in an orderly fashion
and demonstrations are escorted throughout by adequate police force,
but at times demonstrators become unruly, riotous, mischievous or
uncontrollable. There have been clashes between different processions
demonstrating simultaneously and vying for attention. As per the
compilation/data of Delhi Police begining January, 2006 till 15th August,
2010, there were 5491 demonstrations, rallies and processions and
13118 dharnas/hunger strikes were held at Jantar Mantar with prior
permission. Daily 10 groups demonstrate and protest at the site. Steps
taken by the police to mobilize adequate resources and for controlling
and ensuring orderly demonstrations have been highlighted and stated.
It is stated that prior permission is required to be taken and permission
is granted after assessing the situation along with intelligence inputs
with the paramount objective of maintenance of public order, safety
WPC 2680/2011 Page 5 of 9
and security of citizens and tranquility in the neighbourhood. Over the
years, the security system has been streamlined. Steps are also taken to
ensure smooth flow of traffic and maintenance of law and order.
6. In view of the facts, it is easy to visualize the task under taken by
the Delhi Police in order to ensure that the demonstrators, who have
the right to protest/demonstrate and voice their opinion within
reasonable limits, do not disturb and violate the rights of third parties.
This requires divergent and extensive arrangements for water, toilets,
public lighting etc. The Delhi Police has expressed concern that some of
the demonstrators have started using Jantar Mantar as their permanent
address and are even using it as their correspondence address. It is
pointed out that there have been instances when overnight protestors
have suddenly blocked traffic and movement of people at Parliament
Street, Tolstoy Marg etc.
7. The Supreme Court has issued detailed guidelines in the case of
Destruction of Public and Private Properties (supra), which read:-
“12. To effectuate the modalities for preventive
action and adding teeth to the enquiry/investigation,
the following guidelines are to be observed:
As soon as there is a demonstration organised:
WPC 2680/2011 Page 6 of 9
(I) The organiser shall meet the police to review
and revise the route to be taken and to lay down
conditions for a peaceful march or protest;
(II) All weapons, including knives, lathis and the
like shall be prohibited;
(III) An undertaking is to be provided by the
organisers to ensure a peaceful march with marshals
at each relevant junction;
(IV) The police and the State Government shall
ensure videography of such protests to the
maximum extent possible;
(V) The person-in-charge to supervise the
demonstration shall be SP (if the situation is
confined to the district) and the highest police
officer in the State, where the situation stretches
beyond one district;
(VI) In the event that demonstrations turn
violent, the officer-in-charge shall ensure that the
events are videographed through private operators
and also request such further information from the
media and others on the incidents in question;
(VII) The police shall immediately inform the
State Government with reports on the events,
including damage, if any, caused by the police; and(VIII) The State Government shall prepare a
report on the police reports and other information
that may be available to it and shall file a petition
including its report in the High Court or the
Supreme Court as the case may be for the Court in
question to take suo motu action.”
WPC 2680/2011 Page 7 of 9
8. During the course of hearing Mr. Waziri, learned Standing
Counsel for the Government of NCT of Delhi has submitted that they
are trying to locate a different place where processions/demonstrations
by the protestors can be permitted but such identification will take
some time and will require consensus. The respondents have a task of
ensuring that the protestors and demonstrators are not denied their
right to speak and express their point of view but at the same time the
demonstrators cannot hold the public at ransom and must show
concern and respect the rights of others. Balance has to be maintained
to ensure that the rights of all parties are fully protected and not
violated. This is a larger issue but the contentions raised and prayers
made by the petitioners are limited to their own complex, where they
are residing. In these circumstances, it is directed that it shall be the
duty of the local authorities including NDMC to ensure that
area/streets in the area are cleaned and any litter left behind is
removed periodically every day. NDMC may also explore possibility
of cleaning the streets at night or late in the evening or early
WPC 2680/2011 Page 8 of 9
morning. Adequate toilet facilities should be provided. Strict
compliance or regulation may be difficult because the
protesters/demonstrators demonstrating can and do get unruly but
every effort should be made to ensure that protestors/demonstrators
use the toilets and least inconvenience is caused. For the purpose of
convenience of the petitioner, the police and NDMC will furnish to the
office bearers of the petitioner society, telephone numbers of two
officers of Delhi Police and NDMC, who can be contacted in case there
is any problem or obstruction. The directions given by the Supreme
Court in Destruction of Public and Private Properties (supra) will be
meticulously observed.
9. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is
disposed of.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE
May 31, 2011
Kkb/NA
WPC 2680/2011 Page 9 of 9