Thread by @LiveLawIndia

“Protest by violent means can never be part of democracy. State can restrict the right to #protest by certain ways without violating fundamental rights of individuals,” #DelhiHighCourt while framing charges against #SharjeelImam, others in 2019 #JamiaViolence case.

“The video analysis will also reveal that the acts of resistance being presented as normal by the present respondents were not peaceful resistance but violent protest which had turned into riots,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed in the order running into 90 pages.

Read operative part of the order here:

#DelhiHighCourt #Protest #JamiaViolence

Court: Asserting one’s right to raise issues in a democratic set up is not a crime in India. Though protesting has constitutional protection through right of freedom of speech and expression, it is essentially subject to peaceful assembly and peaceful association.

Court: A protest cannot be allowed to endanger others, damage property, restrict essential services and such a protest cannot receive constitutional protection.

#Protest #DelhiHighCourt

Court: The acts of violence and violent speech that instigates violence and endangers rule of law, damage public property and peace are not protected under the Indian Constitution.

#DelhiHighCourt #Protest #JamiaViolence

Court: In the present era of independent social media, in case violent mob would have been allowed to march to streets of Delhi to Parliament which was a curfew bound area, there was apprehension that more persons could have gathered, endangering law and order situation in Delhi.

“The student community is not a different group in itself who enjoys any extra right in this regard but being citizens of India they have equal right to freedom of speech and expression and protest as all other citizens of this country,” Justice Sharma said.

Court: No doubt they can also express their views even if views are unpopular as others citizens, however the law protects the right to express one’s views and protest peacefully but the law does not protect or guarantee the right to protest and demonstrate violently…

Court: In this case, the police was being targeted by pelting stones. As there is no confusion about rights of the individuals to express themselves and to assemble lawfully for lawful purpose, however, the assembly of such persons cannot be permitted to violate laws of the land.

Court: The students therefore knew that they were trying to violate the law by insisting on moving towards that area and breaking barricades and putting property on fire, pelting stones at the spot of Jamia area. Protest by violent means can never be part of democracy.

Court: there can be no question of dissent being suppressed or fundamental right of freedom of expression by peaceful means being infringed, there is no place of violent collective action to register one’s anguish against ideological differences or resistance to govt policy.

Court: assemblies cannot be aimed at destroying the rights of others to achieve their own. Therefore, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly cannot be aimed at destruction of rights and freedom of others who were not part of that protest.

#DelhiHighCourt

Court: Though the right of freedom of expression cannot be criminalized, the threat to life of others and public and private property preventing public servants from doing their duty, the actions of violence and damaging property will certainly attract criminal law.