{"id":128719,"date":"2026-10-13T11:40:39","date_gmt":"2026-10-13T06:10:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=128719"},"modified":"2026-10-13T11:40:39","modified_gmt":"2026-10-13T06:10:39","slug":"jantar-mantar-protest-restrictions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/jantar-mantar-protest-restrictions\/","title":{"rendered":"Jantar Mantar Protest Restrictions: Who Decides Where India Can Protest?"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><b>Jantar Mantar Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Delhi Police have de-notified <\/span><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/jantar-mantar\/\" target=\"_blank\">Jantar Mantar<\/a><\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> as a designated protest site, naming Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground (north Delhi), and CBD Ground (east Delhi) as alternatives.\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Earlier framework<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Organisers needed to apply 10 days in advance to protest at Jantar Mantar (capped at 1,000 people); Ramlila Maidan could accommodate ~50,000 people.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The move followed a recommendation by a committee constituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), with a revised SOP for the new venues to be issued separately.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This comes amid heavy barricading and crackdowns on protesters in central Delhi since October 10, with demonstrators gathering even near areas under prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Why Delhi Is Different: Who Controls Its Police?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Unlike other states, Delhi\u2019s police and public order fall outside the legislative powers of the Delhi Legislative Assembly.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Under <\/span><b>Article 239AA(3)(a) of the Constitution<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the Delhi Assembly can legislate on NCT matters <\/span><b>except those<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> under <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Entries 1, 2, and 18 of the State List<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 covering public order, police, and land.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As a result, Delhi Police functions under the MHA, not the Delhi government, giving the Centre effective control over protest regulation in the capital.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>The Crucial Distinction: Law and Order vs. Public Order<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Police often invoke \u201claw and order\u201d to regulate protests, <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">but Article 19 permits restrictions on fundamental rights specifically on grounds of \u201cpublic order\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 and the Supreme Court has treated these as distinct concepts.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Landmark precedent \u2014 <\/span><b>Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (1966):<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Court described three concentric circles:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"3\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Law and order \u2014 the largest circle.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"3\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Public order \u2014 a narrower circle within it.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"3\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Security of the State \u2014 the smallest, innermost circle.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">An act can affect law and order without affecting public order, just as an act can affect public order without threatening state security.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: The Court held that restrictions for law and order should be least intruding on fundamental freedoms, while restrictions for public order may justify greater restriction, since <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">public order is of greater social concern<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Crucially: Public order is something <\/span><b>distinct<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> from order or orderliness in a local area \u2014 a disturbance must cause actual public disorder, not just a local breach of peace.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Expert Clarification<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Law and order = localised disturbances (e.g., two people fighting, a car blocking a road).<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Public order = disruptions affecting the wider community (e.g., large-scale disruption of transport or communication).<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Law and order is not a valid basis to limit the right to speech and expression.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Police <\/span><b>cannot invoke<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> public order on their own \u2014 a law must first grant them that power, and police must identify the specific law under which they act.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>How Are Protest Sites Legally Designated?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad (1972)<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Court held police can require prior permission for public meetings on streets \u2014 \u201cnothing wrong\u201d with that.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, the State cannot abridge the right of assembly by prohibiting assembly on every public street or place.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) v. Union of India (2018)<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This case dealt with restrictions at Jantar Mantar and a proposal to shift protests to Ramlila Maidan.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Petitioners argued Ramlila Maidan was too far from the \u201cconcentration of power\u201d in New Delhi, undermining the very purpose of protesting against those authorities.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Court accepted this concern, but balanced it against residents\u2019 rights, holding that \u201cparticular areas can be earmarked\u201d while regulating demonstrations in public interest.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It allowed a limited portion of Jantar Mantar Road to remain open for regulated demonstrations by smaller groups, recognising its long historical use as a protest site.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b style=\"font-size: inherit;\">Conclusion<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The de-notification of Jantar Mantar revives a constitutional debate that courts have revisited for decades: who gets to decide where dissent is permitted, and on what legal basis?\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Supreme Court\u2019s concentric-circles framework makes clear that routine administrative inconvenience cannot masquerade as a threat to \u201cpublic order\u201d \u2014 a far higher threshold requiring real disruption to the wider community.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As protest sites shift further from the \u201ccentres of power\u201d they are meant to address, the real test will be whether India\u2019s democratic channels remain genuinely open, or whether procedural relocation becomes a quiet tool for suppressing dissent.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Source:<\/b> <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/delhi-police-de-notifies-jantar-mantar-protests-courts-law-10918349\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">IE<\/a> | <a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/news\/cities\/Delhi\/jantar-mantar-no-longer-legal-protest-site-three-alternative-sites-designated-by-delhi-police\/article71574232.ece\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">TH<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jantar Mantar protest restrictions raise constitutional questions about police powers, public order, freedom of assembly and the right to dissent in India.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":128736,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[8736,60,22,59],"class_list":["post-128719","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","tag-jantar-mantar","tag-mains-articles","tag-upsc-current-affairs","tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs","no-featured-image-padding"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128719","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128719"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128719\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":128748,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128719\/revisions\/128748"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/128736"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128719"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128719"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128719"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}