Section 144 CrPC Orders In Rajasthan Ahead Of Election: Supreme Court Directs District Magistrates To Decide Applications For Public Gatherings Within Three Days
The Apex Court has passed an interim order in a Writ Petition filed challenging orders passed by District Magistrates of various districts in Rajasthan under Section 144 CrPC prohibiting any meetings, gatherings, processions, or dharnas until the declaration of results of the Lok Sabha elections.
The Court directed District Magistrates to decide the applications filed by the Petitioners seeking permission to organize democracy yatras and/or public meetings for educating the public regarding elections, within three days from the date of filing of such applications. The Court has made the said order applicable to any such applications made in future in any part of the country in similar situations.
The Petition was filed by Activists Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India through Advocate Prasanna S seeking to restrain the indiscriminate practice of magistrates and state governments to pass blanket orders under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to prohibit public gatherings ahead of every election.
The Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta ordered, “Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that in pursuance to the clauses in the impugned orders, an application for permission to conduct yatras or public meetings for educating the public with regard to elections, having made to the public authorities, the same were not decided…By way of an interim order, we direct that if any such application is made to the competent authority, the same shall be decided within a period of three days from the making of such an application. Returnable after two weeks.”
Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared on behalf of the Petitioners and submitted that various blanket orders under Section 144 Cr.P.C. are being issued for the whole duration of the upcoming Lok Sabha Elections, prohibiting all assemblies, meetings, demonstrations, etc.
Justice Gavai said, “How can such orders be issued?”
Advocate Bhushan referred to the order passed by the District Magistrate, Rajasthan, which stated, “This order will not apply to religious ceremonies, processions and programs organized under police approval during festivals…No person will be able to organize a procession or public meeting without the prior written permission of the concerned Returning Officer, but this restriction will not apply to marriage ceremonies and funeral processions.”
He also referred to the order under Section 144 CrPC passed by another District Magistrate from Rajasthan which stated, “No person will organize any procession, meeting, protest, speech, etc. in any public place without the approval of the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, nor will any sound broadcasting device be used without the prior permission of the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Permission for use of sound broadcasting equipment can be granted by the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate for the use of broadcasting equipment only from 6.00 am to 10.00 pm. In such events, no one will do any such act which may disturb the traffic system, public order and public peace. This restriction will not apply to processions and funeral processions.”
The Petitioners contended that the prohibitions apply to all persons including those who do not belong to a political party or candidate, irrespective of the agenda or purpose, and held at any place within the municipal limits including community grounds and halls. Thus, the scope of prohibitions is wide and sweeping and it potentially hinders civil society from mobilizing and creating awareness amongst the voters in a time-bound manner, which will in turn help voters exercise their right to vote in its truest form, they said.
Both the Petitioners are part of a civil society group called the ‘Rajasthan Election Watch’ (‘REW’) which has been monitoring elections in Rajasthan since 2003-04.
The Petition further stated that “blanket orders on the ground of impending General Elections is not a ground envisaged under Section 144 and as such to the extent that Section 144 powers are read so widely, it is manifestly unconstitutional for being demonstrably disproportionate. The authorities cannot act merely on the conjecture that there will be a public order issue merely on the grounds of elections having been announced. These orders are neither lawful, nor least restrictive, nor are demonstrably necessary in a democratic society – failing all prongs of the proportionality test articulated by this Court in a catena of cases that state action must pass in order to lawfully restrict fundamental freedoms of citizens.”
Accordingly, the matter is now listed after two weeks.
Cause Title: Aruna Roy & Anr. v. Union Of India And Ors, (W.P.(C) No. 249/2024)
