Supreme Court’s Stance on CJP Protest March
The Supreme Court of India, on Monday, opted not to issue urgent orders regarding a petition against the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) planned protest in Delhi. The protest is scheduled for September 5. The Bench, composed of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana, articulated that at this juncture, the Court could not anticipate a breach of peace or disorder resulting from the CJP’s demonstration.
CJI Surya Kant remarked, “At least as of now, we will presume, and we have no reason to doubt, that everybody will act and behave in a very responsible manner and in a peaceful and lawful manner. So right now, for us, there are no compelling circumstances to presume that anything wrong will happen.” The Bench advised the petitioner to direct their concerns regarding potential law and order disruptions to the Central government.
Background on the CJP Protest
The CJP has organized a peaceful march from India Gate to the Delhi Police Headquarters, in opposition to the Union government’s alleged non-fulfillment of promises made on July 25, specifically relating to the withdrawal of charges against demonstrators. This protest follows the CJP’s previous cessation of the Jantar Mantar agitation over leaked examination papers after governmental assurances.
Application by Retired Officer
In response to the CJP’s announcement, retired Delhi Police officer Rajender Singh filed an application with the Supreme Court. He requested the Court to prohibit protests in Lutyens’ Delhi without proper authorization. The Court scheduled a detailed hearing for this application on September 10, alongside other pending petitions related to CJP protests.
Concerns Over BRICS Summit
Advocate Rizwan, representing Singh, expressed apprehensions about potential law and order issues due to the timing of the protest, which coincides with the 18th BRICS Summit attended by international dignitaries. Rizwan referenced past incidents at the AI Summit to illustrate his concerns. He suggested the CJP conduct their march post-BRICS Summit and seek governmental consent in the interim.
The Bench indicated that the application could be referred to the Solicitor General for consideration and scheduled for discussion with other related applications on September 10.
Legal Responsibilities and Committee Involvement
CJI Kant emphasized the police’s duty to maintain public order and determine the legality of actions. He suggested that the plea be reviewed by a High-Powered Committee recently established by the Supreme Court to address issues stemming from CJP protests. The Bench expressed confidence in both sides adhering to legal norms.
Despite Advocate Rizwan’s insistence on an urgent hearing, CJI Kant highlighted the lack of an organized defendant to summon and maintained that the matter should be addressed by the government.
The Court concluded by reiterating the responsibility of the Union and Delhi governments to enforce law and order, expressing assurance in their legal compliance.
