Maratha agitation: Bombay High Court declines to halt Manoj Jarange's march to Mumbai

The Bombay High Court on Friday refused to issue preemptive orders against Maratha reservation activist Manoj Jarange Patil's proposed march to Mumbai [Nilesh Ramchandra Dhanukar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]..A division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait M Sethna refused to pass orders on a petition filed by Mumbai resident Nilesh Ramchandra Dhanukar seeking directions against the proposed march.The Court said that it cannot pass directions against the march based merely on apprehensions of individuals."Merely on the basis of an apprehension in a petition, we are not going to take such a call. State machinery is capable to handle all these situations," the bench stated..Advocate Mayur Khandeparkar for Dhanukar urged immediate court intervention ahead of the Ganesh festival.He warned that the protest could mirror chaotic 2025 demonstrations that paralyzed South Mumbai. To support the plea, Khandeparkar cited the Supreme Court’s Shaheen Bagh ruling which established that public spaces cannot be occupied indefinitely and dissent must remain in designated areas.He pointed out that protesters flooded key arterial areas including CST, Mantralaya, Marine Drive, and Flora Fountain, blocking traffic and halting public life.He referred to Jarange’s statements encouraging followers to reach Mumbai regardless of permission and urged those unable to travel to block local streets..Advocate General Milind Sathe, appearing for the State, apprised the bench that Jarange is currently on the 13th day of his hunger strike in Jalna. However, he had not applied for permission under the Public Meeting, Agitation and Procession Rules, 2025 for the march to Mumbai, Sathe said.The AG highlighted that Jarange has urged followers to enter the city in guerrilla warfare style ahead of the 10-day Ganesh festival starting September 14.However, Sathe assured the bench that the State is fully equipped to maintain law and order.In light of the same, the Court declined to pass any directions..The bench observed that Dhanukar's case was entirely set up on the basis of past experience. The judges found no circumstances requiring judicial interference and expressed confidence that Jarange would comply with law while exercising his rights."We have no doubt that the Respondent No 4 (Jarange) is a responsible law abiding citizen. In a resilient democracy as ours, whilst exercising his rights, he would be conscious of the mandate of law and would act accordingly," the bench said. .The Court also reaffirmed the constitutional right to peaceful assembly:"If somebody is protesting, if somebody is on a hunger strike, the State should intervene, they should go and talk to the person. This is a democracy. How we can stop a person not to make an agitation? There is a fundamental right.".[Read order]