The Democratic Essence: Article 19 and Peaceful Assembly in India

Topic 6: Article 19 (1) (b) of the Constitution of India?- Freedom of Assembly

Fundamental rights are among the strengthening pillars of our constitution. These rights and duties collectively shape our democracy, making it one of the largest democracies in the world. The constitution defines our state as Socialist, Sovereign, Secular, and Democratic Republic. It also enlists our key objectives, which include Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, and Equality.

Freedom is inherent in human nature. Our state ensures that everyone is free from shackles that encroach upon their freedom. Specifically, Article 19 (1) (b) stipulates:

“Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc.

(1) All citizens shall have the right

(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms.”

This right ensures that the people of this country can assemble peacefully and protest against actions or decisions by the Government or other governmental authorities that they disagree with. A hallmark of any democracy is the acceptance of legitimate disagreement. The primary focus isn't the correctness of the protesters' concerns but the right given to the impacted individuals in a democracy to voice their grievances. Thus, the Constitution safeguards the essential right to peaceful demonstrations and protests. Simply put, the freedom of assembly encompasses the right to hold public meetings, form groups, organise assemblies, functions, celebrations, conduct marches, protests, and take out processions. However, the assembly must remain peaceful, devoid of arms, and cannot be held on government premises or private property owned by others.

Fundamental rights, including the right to assembly, have faced challenges due to abuses of power and conflicting interests. In the case of Himmat Lal v. Police Commissioner, Bombay (1973 AIR 87), the Supreme Court invalidated a rule allowing the police commissioner to entirely prohibit public meetings and processions. The state can only impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order but cannot prohibit all meetings or processions entirely.

In the case of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sanghatan vs. Union Of India (AIR 2018 SC 3476), the petitioner's grievance was regarding the repetitive issuance of orders under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. Each order would last 60 days, and upon its expiry, another similar order would be issued, effectively banning public meetings and peaceful assemblies.

The court observed, “Undoubtedly, holding peaceful demonstrations to air grievances and to ensure that these grievances are heard in the relevant quarters, is its fundamental right. This right is specifically enshrined under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India. Article 19(1)(a) confers a very valuable right”.

For an assembly to enjoy protection, it must remain peaceful and avoid causing public disorder. If an assembly becomes disorderly or incites violence, it no longer benefits from the protection of Article 19 (1) (b). Reasonable restrictions can then be applied as per Article 19 (3) to maintain India's sovereignty, integrity, or public order. Under Article 19 (3), a magistrate can, through Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1973), halt an assembly, meeting, or procession if it poses a risk to human life, health, safety, or might disturb public peace or incite violence.

In essence, while the Indian Constitution ardently champions the fundamental right of its citizens to peacefully assemble and voice their grievances, this right is not absolute. Assemblies must remain non-violent and not jeopardise public safety or order. The balance between safeguarding democratic values and ensuring public security exemplifies the complexities of governing one of the world's largest democracies. It underscores the importance of responsible citizenship and judicious governance.

This Article was written by Mr. Harsimran Bindra , Associate Attorney at Vis Legis Law Practice, Advocates