4 days ago
Gujarat High Court to Examine Limits on Refusing Protest Permissions
Subodh Kumud wanted to hold a small protest in Ahmedabad.
He said it would support other protesters and would not use loudspeakers.
Police refused permission, saying the gathering could inconvenience traffic and the public.
Kumud says the rules allow refusals only for specific reasons and that traffic concerns alone were not enough.
The protest happened anyway, and participants were held at a police station for a few hours.
No criminal case was filed against Kumud.
The state says he applied too close to the event and that the location could disrupt traffic.
The Gujarat High Court will consider the arguments and the rules for deciding protest applications.
Subodh Kumud challenged police refusal of permission for a planned Ahmedabad protest.
He sought to gather about 50 people on July 20 and said no loudspeakers would be used.
Police cited possible inconvenience to traffic and the public in rejecting the application.
Kumud argues that refusal requires a specific ground under the 1975 rules and questions which officer decided his application.
The state says he applied only three days ahead and that the proposed venue could disrupt traffic; the court is considering the petition.
- Who
- Subodh Kumud, the Gujarat government, and the Gujarat High Court.
- What
- The court is considering when police may lawfully refuse permission for a protest.
- Where
- Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
- When
- The protest was planned for July 20; the court was scheduled to take up the petition again on Wednesday, October 7.
- Why
- Kumud challenges the refusal of his protest application, arguing that possible traffic inconvenience alone was not a sufficient legal ground.
Petitioner's position
State's position
Reason for refusing the protest
Petitioner's position
Subodh Kumud argues that possible traffic inconvenience alone is not a lawful basis to refuse permission without a specific finding under Rule 8(1) of the 1975 rules.
State's position
The state says the proposed site was where five roads converge, so the protest could disrupt traffic and create a public-order concern.
Timing and handling of the application
Petitioner's position
Kumud says a police inspector lacked authority to decide his application and seeks directions against summoning applicants to police stations and for decisions at least 48 hours before events.
State's position
The state argues that Kumud applied only three days before the event, despite a rule requiring applications at least seven days in advance unless shorter notice is justified.
Request for broader court directions
Petitioner's position
Kumud seeks a declaration that traffic inconvenience alone cannot justify refusing protest permission.
State's position
The state says the petition is infructuous and that blanket directions are unnecessary because existing rules already govern applications.
Key facts
- Petitioner
- Subodh Kumud
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
- Application submitted
- July 17
- Planned protest
- July 20, from 6 pm to 8:30 pm, with about 50 people
- Proposed venue
- M J Library, Ahmedabad
- Applicable rules
- Regulations and Conduct of Assembly and Procession (Ahmedabad Police Commissioner Area) Rules, 1975
- Outcome on protest day
- The protest went ahead; participants were detained for a few hours, and no FIR was registered against Kumud.
Sources
Related news
Delhi Police Denies CJP Protest Permit, Citing Safety Concerns
Delhi Denies Protest Permission, Tightens Security Ahead of Demonstration
Why Protesters in India Must Seek Permission to Demonstrate
Delhi Police Denies CJP Protest Permission, Seeks Metro Restrictions
Mumbai Police Deny CJP Protest, Founder Threatens Jail Bharo
High Court Questions Delhi Police Denial of Karni Sena Protest
Gujarat High Court Seeks Response on Bharuch Mosque Dispute
Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Over Buddha Images on Sarees
Supreme Court Upholds Increment for Regularised Daily-Wage Workers
Supreme Court Pauses Coercive Action Against Tata Chemicals
