- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
The petition also seeks directions for laying down guidelines on restrictions for holding protests in public places.
Another plea in relation to the protests in Shaheen Bagh in Delhi has been filed before the Supreme Court by BJP leader Nand Kishore Garg, which seeks for the removal of protesters from the protest site on Kalindi Kunj road.
The petition against the protest demonstration held at Delhi's Shaheen Bagh since December 15, has also called for laying down guidelines with respect to restrictions on protests in public places.
Garg sought an urgent hearing of his petition from the Supreme Court today. However, the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, who was sitting on the Bench with Justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant, told Garg to approach the mentioning officer for the same.
The petitioner avers that the occupation of the Kalindi Kunj road has led to obstructions for the citizens and led to blockade of a road that connects Delhi with Noida. This protest of nearly fifty days has led to an increased traffic congestion in the adjoining areas in Delhi NCR as well as on the arterial roads, the petitioner adds.
At the outset, the petition states that while the protest in itself is not illegal, the same has however, lost its legality on account of "blatant and brazen" flouting of constitutional rights by the protesters for their "ulterior purpose."
The petition also claims that the law enforcement machineries are held up at the "whims and fancies" of the protesters at the site.As a result, the authorities are not able to discharge their duties as per the law. Redressal of the grievances of the common man caused by this obstruction remains elusive, the petitioner argues.
Terming the pro-democracy protests as a "spectacle of devastating politically motivated situation", the petitioner says that the Apex Court of the country ought not to be a silent spectator when the common public is being obstructed.
Citing the Delhi High Court's order, the petitioner says that with the High Court refusing to intervene directly in the matter, the petitioner was constrained to move the Top Court.