NEWSLETTER

Sign up to read weekly email newsletter

11 years 🥳 of Publication

Legal Desire Media and Insights
Donate
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Reading: Violence, Nuisance Not the Part of Free Speech and Expression: Supreme Court on Darjeeling Hills Violence
Share
Aa
Legal Desire Media and InsightsLegal Desire Media and Insights
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Follow US
Legal Desire Media & Insights
Home » Blog » Violence, Nuisance Not the Part of Free Speech and Expression: Supreme Court on Darjeeling Hills Violence
JudgmentsNews

Violence, Nuisance Not the Part of Free Speech and Expression: Supreme Court on Darjeeling Hills Violence

By Apoorva Sinha 3 Min Read
Share

A writ petition was filed by Bimal Gurang, President of Gorkha Janmukti Morcha(GJM) praying to transfer of investigation all the FIRs filed against him and members of GJM to any independent investigation agency.  The FIRs were filed by West Bengal Government for violent unrest in the Darjeeling Hills.

A bench comprising of Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan dismissed the petition. The Court did not find the case to be fit where it may exercise the jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution to transfer the case to an independent agency.

The Court checked the constitutional validity of demonstrations. The Court held,  “demonstrations whether political, religious or social or other demonstrations which create public, disturbances or operate as nuisances, or create or manifestly threaten some tangible public or private mischief, are not covered by protection under Article 19(1)”.

Public demonstrations which resort to violence, including stone-throwing are not protected by the fundamental right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).

Justice Bhushan, wrote the judgment observed that Constitution only protects the right to assemble peacefully. It was also held that public speech should not incite the violence, such speech shall not be covered under Article 19 (1)(a). Right to freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to assemble peaceably and without arms as protected by Article 19(1)(b) are the rights which have importance, the court held.

The court referred to the Kerala High Court’s judgment on ‘bandhs’ to evoke the judicial objections against methods used by particular groups or parties or sects to paralyze the entire citizenry.

“No political party or organisation can claim that it is entitled to paralyse the industry and commerce in the entire State or nation and is entitled to prevent the citizens, not in sympathy with its viewpoint, from exercising their fundamental rights or from performing their duties for their own benefit or for the benefit of the State or the nation”, Justice Bhushan reproduced the verdict of the high court given almost 20 years ago.

 

You Might Also Like

October 2024 Depo Provera Lawsuit Update

Shubham Malhotra launches LawStrings Management., A New-Age Business Development Consulting Firm for the Global Legal Industry

Latham Advises Astorg Philanthropy Investments on Series A Fundraising of InHeart

Aumirah announces Comprehensive Newsletter Series on Key Legal Topics

SpiceJet Refutes Claims by KAL Airways and Kalanithi Maran, Labels Damages Claim as Baseless

Subscribe

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Apoorva Sinha March 19, 2018
Share this Article
Facebook Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Leave a comment Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

October 2024 Depo Provera Lawsuit Update

Depo-Provera is a widely used contraceptive injection that has recently come under legal scrutiny. Thousands of women across the United…

News
November 9, 2024

Shubham Malhotra launches LawStrings Management., A New-Age Business Development Consulting Firm for the Global Legal Industry

The legal industry welcomes a new force in business development consulting with the launch of LawStrings Management, Founded by Shubham Malhotra,…

Law Firm & In-house UpdatesNews
September 30, 2024

Latham Advises Astorg Philanthropy Investments on Series A Fundraising of InHeart

Latham & Watkins has advised Astorg Philanthropy Investments (API) in the €11 million Series A funding round of InHeart, a…

News
June 29, 2024

Aumirah announces Comprehensive Newsletter Series on Key Legal Topics

Aumirah, a leading law firm in India’s IP sector, announces the launch of a series of newsletters aimed at providing…

News
June 14, 2024

For over 10 years, Legal Desire provides credible legal industry updates and insights across the globe.

  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Legal Marketing Service for Law Firms and Lawyers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Condition
  • Cancellation/Refund Policy

Follow US: 

Legal Desire Media & Insights

For Submissions/feedbacks/sponsorships/advertisement/syndication: office@legaldesire.com

Legal Desire Media & Insights 2023

✖
Cleantalk Pixel

Removed from reading list

Undo
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Register Lost your password?