The Supreme Court on Friday called for a rethink of Delhi’s decades-old arrangement of holding demonstrations at Jantar Mantar, recording that the Delhi Police commissioner and other competent authorities would consider designating an alternative venue with better facilities for peaceful protesters.
The suggestion emerged during the hearing of pleas challenging sweeping restrictions on metro and railway services ahead of the October 10 protests in Delhi. In 2017, the National Green Tribunal ordered a ban on protests along Jantar Mantar Road and directed that demonstrators be shifted to Ramlila Maidan, citing complaints about noise, sanitation and the occupation of public space. The Supreme Court set aside the blanket prohibition in July 2018, holding that peaceful demonstrations could not be prohibited altogether, although they could be regulated to protect residents’ rights and maintain public order.
Because jantar Mantar has served as Delhi’s principal protest hub for more than three decades, hosting demonstrations by political parties, farmers, trade unions, students and civil society groups, the intervention carries significance. The court directed the Centre and Delhi Police to reconsider the complete stoppage of public transport, emphasising that preventive security measures must remain proportionate and cannot deprive millions of residents of access to essential services. Its location in central Delhi, within reach of Parliament and government offices, has made it a prominent venue for citizens seeking to draw attention to their grievances. The Supreme Court’s latest observations revive the question of whether the existing arrangement adequately balances the right to protest with the practical demands of managing large gatherings in the national capital. The bench clarified during the transport hearing that it was not examining the merits of the protest or the organisers’ claims, as the organisers were not before it. Its focus was on safeguarding public access to transport and ensuring that security restrictions did not become a blanket prohibition.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the national capital needed a larger, better-equipped space where citizens could exercise their democratic right to protest without compromising public safety, access to emergency services or the interests of other residents.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary Mariam Alexander Baby, responded that Ramlila Maidan had previously served as an alternative protest venue but was no longer being offered as an option when permission to demonstrate at Jantar Mantar was denied.
