The Supreme Court sought responses from the Centre and Delhi Police over shifting protests from Jantar Mantar. The case tests whether distant venues undermine effective assembly, visibility and public dissent.
Newdelhi,Oct 15, 2026 16:14 IST
The Supreme Court on Thursday sought responses from the Centre and Delhi Police on a petition challenging the removal of Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site and the selection of three alternative venues, news agency Press Trust of India reported.
The petition challenges an October 11 standing order issued by Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, which designated Ramlila Ground, Burari Ground and CBD Ground in east Delhi as the new venues for protests and demonstrations.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi orally observed that it would examine whether the authorities had properly considered the use and effectiveness of Jantar Mantar as a protest site.
During the hearing of the petition filed by advocate Swaty Singh, senior lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan sought the restoration of the notification designating Jantar Mantar as a protest site. He said the removal of the designation had been stated to be in accordance with an earlier Supreme Court order.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, however, clarified that the earlier Supreme Court decision was not the basis for the latest order. He said a committee formed to examine the matter had submitted a report recording the reasons for the decision, according to Press Trust of India.
Senior advocate Mukta Gupta said a designated protest site must be a place where demonstrators could effectively make their voices heard. Justice Bagchi observed that the issue also needed to be considered in the context of technological developments.
Referring to the argument that Jantar Mantar should remain a protest site because of its proximity to government establishments, Justice Bagchi indicated that the court would ask the authorities to respond to the concerns raised.
The Supreme Court also directed Delhi Police to submit the prohibitory orders issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, formerly Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. These orders had restricted public gatherings and demonstrations in Delhi on various dates over the previous fortnight.
The court also instructed all law enforcement agencies to preserve CCTV footage and other digital evidence related to the protests.
The petition said shifting protests to distant and outlying areas could make the fundamental rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression ineffective.
It argued that the right to protest was not limited to gathering at a designated physical location, but also included the ability to communicate grievances, express dissent and draw the attention of public authorities and society to issues requiring redress.
“The location of a protest is, therefore, not an inconsequential administrative consideration,” the petition said. It added that proximity to the institutions concerned, public accessibility and visibility to the intended audience could directly affect the effectiveness of a demonstration.
The petition also claimed that the standing order under challenge was arbitrary and procedurally deficient. “A notification which withdraws an existing venue can't be regarded as preserving the right to protest merely because alternative locations have been identified, particularly when the detailed arrangements governing access to those locations are left to a subsequent standard operating procedure,” it said.
The court will examine the decision to remove Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site after considering the responses of the Centre and Delhi Police, along with the records and prohibitory orders it has sought.
- Ends