"Supreme Court voices concern over criminalisation of peaceful dissent in India"
Deliberative democracy
a model of democracy in which public reasoning, debate, and dissent are integral to legitimate governance.
Constitutional morality
adherence to the transformative values of the Constitution, even against popular or majoritarian sentiment.
The right to peaceful protest in India is not a standalone enumerated right but emerges from a cluster of provisions in Part III of the Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression; Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; and Article 19(1)(c) guarantees the right to form associations or unions. Together, these provisions constitute the constitutional bedrock of the right to dissent and protest. A second layer is provided by Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty — interpreted expansively by the Supreme Court to include the right against arbitrary detention and the right to dignity — and Article 22, which mandates specific procedural safeguards for arrested persons: the right to be informed of grounds of arrest, the right to consult a legal practitioner, and the right to be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours.
These rights are not absolute. Articles 19(2) and 19(3) permit the state to impose reasonable restrictions on grounds including public order, sovereignty, decency, and morality. The constitutional standard, however, is not whether a restriction is imposed in the name of public order but whether it is reasonable and proportionate — a distinction the Supreme Court has consistently enforced. The concept of deliberative democracy, in which citizens engage the state through public expression and assembly, underpins the normative justification for treating protest rights as integral to constitutional governance rather than as a concession from the state.
The Supreme Court has, over decades, built a rich jurisprudence around the right to dissent. In Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012), the Court held that the right to peaceful protest against a law or policy is a fundamental right and that the state cannot invoke public order as a pretext for dispersing a lawful assembly. In Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020) — the Shaheen Bagh case — the Court acknowledged the right to protest while holding that public roads cannot be indefinitely blocked, striking a balance between the right to assembly and the rights of others. The D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) guidelines remain the foundational framework governing arrest procedures, requiring police to follow specific steps to prevent custodial abuse.
Bail jurisprudence is a critical dimension of this debate. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the principle that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception" — a principle rooted in the presumption of innocence under Article 21. …
Under which Article of the Constitution of India is the 'Right to Privacy' protected?
Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement ?
In India, Judicial Review implies
Which one of the following statements is correct?
Consider the following statements regarding the constitutional framework for the right to peaceful protest in India:
1.Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms.
2.Reasonable restrictions on the right to assemble under Article 19(3) can be imposed on grounds of morality.
3.Article 22 requires every arrested person to be produced before a magistrate within 48 hours of arrest.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
With reference to the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) case, consider the following:
1.The majority held that the right to move courts for enforcement of Article 21 could be suspended during a Proclamation of Emergency.
2.Justice H.R. Khanna dissented, holding that the state cannot deprive a person of life and liberty without legal authority even during an Emergency.
3.The 42nd Constitutional Amendment subsequently codified Justice Khanna's position by making Articles 20 and 21 non-suspendable.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
The principle that 'bail is the rule and jail is the exception' in Indian law is primarily rooted in which constitutional provision?
Assertion (A): The Supreme Court in Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020) held that the right to peaceful protest is a fundamental right but indefinite occupation of public roads is not constitutionally protected.
Reason (R): Article 19(3) permits reasonable restrictions on the right to assemble in the interests of public order and the sovereignty and integrity of India.
Which of the following is correct?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account