Supreme Court: no group can hold a protest site indefinitely, as it sorts anti-CEC pleas

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the right to protest does not allow any one group to hold a designated protest site indefinitely, while hearing a batch of petitions arising from the October protests in Delhi against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana did not pass any final ruling on the protests themselves; it mainly organised how the many connected cases will be heard.

"You cannot occupy a site for all times to come. There are other protesters. Where will the farmers go? Where will the workers go? Where will the trade unions go? Where will the homeless go? Everybody has a right to protest," the Chief Justice said, according to Bar and Bench. The lead case is MA Baby v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1333 of 2026.

What the court did

According to LiveLaw's report of the hearing, the bench:

• directed the Kirana Committee Delhi and other trading associations to add the organisers of the protests as parties to their plea, saying it could not fully decide the traders' grievances otherwise, and issued notice on that plea;
• decided to divide the connected petitions into nine categories for separate hearings and asked counsel for proposed arguing sequences and time estimates;
• issued notice on a petition questioning the legal framework for facial-recognition surveillance at protest sites and the use and security of the data collected;
• said it would hear separately, after Diwali, a plea about alleged harassment of women journalists and a request for a separate investigating committee; and
• indicated that fresh writ petitions would not ordinarily be entertained unless the Advocate-on-Record certifies that they raise a new and distinct issue.

The Chief Justice also said permission orders for protests should clearly define their terms and conditions, and that sites should be allotted for identified periods so that different groups can use them.

The competing claims

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Delhi's trading associations, told the court that businesses had lost money running into thousands of crores during the festive season, and asked that protests be barred for two months. Bar and Bench reported him as putting the revenue loss at Rs 2,000 crore. He said shops in areas such as Connaught Place had stayed shut and that "our people are bleeding".

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi Police, said permission for a protest at Jantar Mantar in July had been granted for one day but the site was occupied for 17 days, and that protesters then marched towards Parliament without permission. Mehta named the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) as the group concerned. He argued that protesters could not be allowed to go to Parliament or the Supreme Court without permission.

For the petitioners challenging the police action, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy said Jantar Mantar was a designated protest site and alleged that violence during the protests was committed by Delhi Police. She referred to the detention of around 7,000 people. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appeared for a petitioner seeking a standard procedure to regulate foreigners' participation in protests.

The bench noted that the right to protest and the right to trade and earn a livelihood both have constitutional recognition, and referred in particular to daily-wage workers' loss of income.

Background

The protests demand Kumar's resignation and a rollback of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The BJP and the Election Commission reject the allegations against the commission and say the revision is meant to improve the accuracy of the rolls, with wrongly removed voters able to seek re-registration. The opposition INDIA bloc held a large rally in Delhi on 1 November.

What happens next

The court has not yet fixed dates for the nine categories of petitions; it asked counsel for schedules. The petition on harassment of women journalists will be heard after Diwali, which falls on 8 November this year. The traders' plea will move forward once the protest organisers have been added as parties.