The Indian constitutional framework recognizes the right to protest as a fundamental right under
Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b), but this right is not absolute and must be balanced against the state’s
obligation to maintain public order and the rights of other citizens. While the state is duty-bound to
respect and encourage peaceful dissent, it may impose reasonable restrictions to ensure public
safety, prevent the obstruction of public ways, and protect the sovereignty and integrity of the
nation.
Key Points
The right to protest is a fundamental right, but it does not exist in isolation and must be balanced
against contrasting rights of other citizens and the state’s interest in public order.
Public ways and spaces cannot be occupied indefinitely or in a manner that causes grave
inconvenience to the public.
Demonstrations must be held in designated places to ensure that the exercise of one right does not
extinguish the rights of others.
The state has the authority to regulate assemblies through reasonable restrictions, provided such
actions are not arbitrary and are supported by law.
The judiciary acts as a sentinel to ensure that state restrictions on protests are objective, necessary,
and not used to throttle legitimate dissent.
Detailed Analysis
The Constitutional Basis of Protest
The right to protest is an essential component of a vibrant democracy, enabling citizens to express
dissent and hold the government accountable. This right is derived from the freedom of speech and
expression and the right to assemble peacefully.
“Our Constitutional scheme comes with right to protest and express dissent, but with an obligation
towards certain duties. Article 19 confers upon its citizens two treasured rights, i.e., right to freedom
of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and right to assemble peacefully without arms under
Article 19(1)(b).
These rights, in cohesion, enable every citizen to assemble peacefully and protest against actions or
inactions of State.” AMIT SAHNI VS COMMISSIONER OF POLICE – 2020 6 Supreme 465
Balancing Rights and Public Order
The exercise of fundamental rights is subject to reasonable restrictions. The state is empowered to
regulate the time, place, and manner of protests to prevent public nuisance and ensure the smooth
functioning of public life.
“Streets and public parks exist primarily for other purposes and the social interest promoted by
untrammelled exercise of freedom of utterance and assembly in public street must yield to social
interest which prohibition and regulation of speech are designed to protect. But there is a
constitutional difference between reasonable regulation and arbitrary exclusion.” All India Secular
Front (ISF) VS State of West
Bengal – 2025 0 Supreme(Cal) 103
Limitations on Protests
While the state must facilitate peaceful protests, it is not required to permit the indefinite
occupation of public spaces, especially when such actions cause significant disruption to the general
public.
“Democracy and dissent go hand in hand, but then the demonstrations expressing dissent have to be
in designated places alone. The present case was not even one of protests taking place in an
undesignated area, but was a blockage of a public way which caused grave inconvenience to
commuters. We cannot accept the plea of the applicants that an indeterminable number of people
can assemble whenever they
choose to protest.” AMIT SAHNI VS COMMISSIONER OF POLICE – 2020 6 Supreme 465
Exceptions and Limitations
The state’s power to restrict protests is not absolute. Any restriction must be reasonable, non-
arbitrary, and backed by law. The use of force by the state to disperse protesters must be
proportionate and used only as a last resort in emergent situations. Authorities are expected to
exercise restraint and provide reasonable notice before enforcing prohibitory orders, such as those
under “act.
