PSIR Simplified

The CJP protest in Jantar Mantar, Delhi (20 July, 2026) and use of lathi charge and force by the police has raised the questions about the right to protest and the limit of use of force by the state. The Police has also filed FIRs against protesting students on many grounds but mainly on the ground of breach of peace. After negotiations between the government and leaders of protest, it was reported that cases would be withdrawn against the students. The CJP has again threatened to launch agitation if the cases against the July 20, 2026 protestors are not withdrawn. The matter has also reached the Supreme Court under the two separate writ petitions to the same effect. This situation makes it necessary to understand the legal contours of Right to Protest and the limit of use of police force against the protestors.

Right to Peaceful Protest is a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.

1. The Right to Protest flows from the Article 19(1) (a) and 19 (1) (b).

While Article 19(1) (a) gives to all citizens the right to freedom of expression, the Article 19(1) (b) states that all citizens shall have  the right to assemble peacefully without arms.

There is no doubt that the protestors were not armed. Hence, they are fully protected to enjoy the right to protest.

• The right to protest is subject to certain limitations mentioned in Article 19(3), which says that the state can impose reasonable restrictions on this right on the ground of ‘Sovereignty and Integrity of India’ or Public Order’.

In the instant case, not violation of sovereignty and integrity of India as protesting youths were not challenging the sovereignty of India, Opposition to the government of the day is not the same as challenging the sovereignty of India. Thus, any restrictions on the 20 July protestors cannot be imposed on the ground of Sovereignty and Integrity of India.

Thus, whatever, restrictions were imposed by the police during these protests were imposed on the ground of public order.

Now the question is whether restriction, lathi charge and use of tear gas was Reasonable or not? The test of reasonableness of the police force the core issue involved in this case, because the same is mandated under Article 19(3) as mentioned above.

What is Supreme Court’s View in earlier cases?

1. In  Ramlila Maidan Incident v. Home Secretary case in 2012 the Supreme Court held that that citizens have a fundamental right to assemble and stage peaceful protests. This right cannot be arbitrarily taken away by executive or legislative action.
2. In the case of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India in 2018, the Court underlined the importance of peaceful demonstrations and directed the directing authorities to balance the right to protest with public convenience.
3. In the case of Anita Thakur v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, 2016, the Supreme Court held that right to peacefully protest is a fundamental right It also ruled that the police cannot use excessive or uncalculated force on orderly protesters.

In the wake of recent CJP protest, the Supreme Court observed that mere agitation or assembly does not automatically justify police lathi-charges or excessive force.  Now the court has to decide whether the force used by the police against protestors of CJP was excessive and unreasonable or not. The ruling of the Supreme Court in the pending cases regarding CJP protest will further clarify the legal situation on the issue.