The Madura Bench of Madras High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking permission to conduct a daily protest titled “Ahimsa Path” at a specific location in Theni district "until World War ends" [S Prabhu Vs District Collector].

Justice L Victoria Gowri also imposed costs of ₹50,000 on the petitioner, one S Prabhu.

The Court said that the right to protest does not extend to occupying a public place indefinitely at one’s discretion.

The judge directed that the amount imposed as costs be paid to a government school within one week.

The petitioner moved the Court seeking permission to conduct peaceful protests every day from 10 am to 12 noon “until the World War ends”.

He claimed it was an exercise of his fundamental rights of free speech and freedom of assembly under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution

The Court, however, held that while peaceful protest is a protected democratic right, it is subject to reasonable restrictions.

“The right to protest cannot therefore be elevated into a right to occupy any place, at any time, for any duration, solely at the will of the person asserting it,” the Court observed

The police had rejected permission for the chosen location on the ground that it was a busy junction and that a daily protest would disrupt traffic and public movement.

The Court found that the rejection was based on valid considerations of public order and convenience and was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.

Importantly, the authorities had suggested alternative venues where the protest could be held without causing inconvenience.

The Court noted that the petitioner refused to conduct the protest at alternative venues - near the statues of Dr BR Ambedkar and Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar - on the ground that both had become “icons of casteism.”

Such remarks against Dr. Ambedkar and Thevar were wholly unwarranted, the Court opined.

"This Court is constrained to observe that such remarks, made in the course of a judicial proceeding, are wholly unwarranted. Dr.B.R.Ambedkar occupies an exalted place in the constitutional history of this nation as the principal architect of the Constitution of India and as a towering voice for social justice, equality, and human dignity. Likewise, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar is remembered in the public sphere as a significant historical and political figure. A litigant cannot be permitted to justify his refusal of reasonable alternatives by making disparaging generalisations about personalities of such public importance," the order said.

The Court underscored that the case was not one of denial of the right to protest, but rather the petitioner’s insistence on a specific location.

Hence, it proceeded to dismiss the petition with costs.

It also warned that failure to pay the costs within one week would result in one day of simple imprisonment.

The State authorities were represented by advocates M Sakthi Kumar and M Muthumanikkam.

[Read Judgment]