Public roads shouldn’t be blocked, reiterates Supreme Court

Reiterating that public roads shouldn’t be blocked, the Supreme Court on Friday made Haryana and Uttar Pradesh social gathering to a plea highlighting site visitors woes on account of the continued farmers protests.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta which had earlier issued discover to the Delhi Police Commissioner on the plea by Monicca Agarwaal – a Noida-based lady – informed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta with out referring to the protests in opposition to the farm legal guidelines that “we are not concerned with how you resolve this issue, whether politically, administratively or judicially. But, we have said this before that roads should not be blocked. This is a single mother who has to face many issues because of blocked roads”.
The bench added that “public streets should not be blocked” and this has been held so repeatedly earlier than.
Agarwaal stated in her plea that she needed to usually journey to Delhi as she was doing a advertising job however the commute from Noida was taking her two hours as a substitute of the standard 20 minutes as a result of blockades. She added that she had some medical points too.

Mehta, who stated he’s showing for the Delhi authorities, submitted that UP and Haryana must also be made events. The courtroom agreed and glued the matter for additional listening to subsequent on April 19.

Earlier, a bench headed by Justice Kaul, in its judgment on pleas in opposition to blockade of highway at Shaheen Bagh within the nationwide capital in the course of the anti-CAA protest, had stated that occupying public locations for protests shouldn’t be acceptable and such an area can’t be occupied “indefinitely”.
Mehta stated in addition to the Delhi Police, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana be made events and the counsel for these states can be showing within the listening to.
Issuing discover on March 26, the bench had informed the petitioner that if there’s a blockade, it’s an administrative failure as judicial view has already been propounded by the courtroom.
In its October 7, 2020, judgment on protests in opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, in Shaheen Bagh space, the SC whereas expressing its sturdy disapproval of the style wherein the protests have been organised had dominated that protests should be carried out “in designated areas alone” and “public ways and public spaces cannot be occupied… and that too indefinitely”.

In February this yr, the courtroom dismissed petitions searching for evaluation of the judgment reiterating that the Constitutional assure of the fitting to protest comes with some riders and there can’t be continued occupation of public place in case of extended dissent or protest.