The right to protest and the lim­its of police power

Source: The post “The right to protest and the lim­its of police power” has been created based on “The right to protest and the lim­its of police power” published in “The Hindu ” on 24th July 2026.

UPSC Syllabus:  GS-2- Governance

Context: The right to peaceful protest is a fundamental democratic right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution. However, it is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(3) to balance individual freedoms with public order and security.

Constitutional and Legal Framework Governing Protests

1. Article 19(1)(b) guarantees citizens the right to assemble peacefully and without arms.
2. Article 19(3) permits reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order, sovereignty, and integrity of India.
3. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), an assembly of five or more persons becomes unlawful only if its common object involves criminal force, resisting law, committing an offence, or compelling others through force or threats.
4. Under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), authorities may impose prohibitory orders to prevent protests in specified areas when necessary to maintain public order.
5. The BNSS empowers an Executive Magistrate or authorised police officer to order the dispersal of an unlawful assembly or one likely to disturb public peace. Force may be used only if the assembly refuses to disperse.

Standards Governing Police Action

1. The NHRC Manual on Human Rights for Police Officers states that democratic policing must protect both public order and citizens’ rights.
2. The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms require police action to be lawful, necessary, and proportionate.
3. The Code of Conduct for the Police in India mandates that police should first use persuasion, advice, and warnings, and resort only to the minimum force necessary.
4. The BNSS requires police officers making arrests to display clear identification, though no similar requirement exists for officers engaged in crowd control.

Supreme Court’s Stand

1. Anita Thakur v. State of Jammu & Kashmir (2016): Excessive police force violates fundamental rights; police action must be reasonable and accountable.
2. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018): Authorities may regulate protests but cannot extinguish the right to protest altogether.
3. Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020): The right to dissent is constitutional, but public spaces cannot be occupied indefinitely.

Way Forward

1. Ensure uniform Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for crowd management based on necessity and proportionality.
2. Strengthen police accountability through mandatory identification during crowd-control operations.
3. Promote dialogue and negotiation before resorting to coercive measures.
4. Designate adequate protest sites while ensuring meaningful public access and visibility.
5. Provide judicial oversight and prompt investigation into allegations of excessive police force.
6. Balance fundamental rights with public order through proportionate and transparent policing.

Conclusion: The right to protest is an essential feature of a constitutional democracy. While the State has a legitimate duty to maintain public order, restrictions and police action must remain lawful, necessary, proportionate, and accountable to preserve both democratic freedoms and the rule of law.

Question:  “The right to protest is a cornerstone of democracy, but it is subject to reasonable restrictions.” Discuss the constitutional and legal framework governing protests in India.

Source: The Hindu