The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a notice on PILs challenging Delhi Police’s decision to de-notify Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site and replace it with three alternative venues.
The court asked the government whether the decision was prompted by its oral observations or followed an assessment of Jantar Mantar’s suitability as a protest venue.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the court’s ruling was not the basis for the decision. A committee had been formed much earlier and had submitted a detailed report, he told the court.
While hearing related petitions alleging police excesses during the protests, the court directed police authorities to preserve all CCTV footage of the demonstrations. It said private parties could also preserve videos to present as evidence.
The court also heard arguments on alleged attacks on and mistreatment of women journalists during the protests and marches. Senior advocate Indira Jaising said the journalists were carrying out their professional duties.
THREE ALTERNATIVE PROTEST SITES
Delhi Police denotified Jantar Mantar through a standing order dated October 11, naming Ramlila Ground in Old Delhi, CBD Ground in East Delhi and Burari Ground in North Delhi as designated venues for protests and demonstrations.
The order, signed by Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, partially modified an April 28, 2022, standing order that had designated Jantar Mantar as a protest venue.
Police said revised standard operating procedures for gatherings at the three sites would be issued separately. The order cited recommendations from a committee constituted by the Union Home Ministry.
STANDOFF OVER PROTEST PERMISSION
The decision came amid a standoff between Delhi Police and the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) over permission to hold a peaceful protest at Jantar Mantar.
After leaving Parliament Street police station on Monday, CJP leaders demanded a date for the demonstration and an explanation for the denial of permission.
Chief spokesperson Saurav Das said the party had formally informed police of its plans and that the intimation had been accepted. However, police had neither given a date nor explained the restrictions, he alleged.
“We have given them 24 hours to give us a date,” Das said, warning that the party would announce a march if police failed to respond.
He also alleged that protesters had been beaten inside buses during the recent crackdown and that senior police officers had avoided speaking to the CJP delegation.
The denotification came ahead of the INDIA bloc’s planned march to the Supreme Court against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Opposition leaders questioned the scale of security deployment and restrictions on public movement.
The police order, however, did not explicitly link the change in protest venues to either the CJP’s demand or the INDIA bloc’s planned march.
- Ends