Unlawful Assemblies During Protests
What is an Unlawful Assembly?
Under Section 141 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), an assembly of five or more persons is termed “unlawful” if their common object falls within one or more categories listed in that section. These include:
To commit a criminal trespass,
To resist the execution of law,
To commit mischief or criminal intimidation,
To compel someone to do or not do something by force,
Or any other unlawful purpose.
Section 143 IPC punishes unlawful assembly with imprisonment or fine.
Protests and Unlawful Assemblies
Peaceful protests are constitutionally protected under Article 19(1)(b) (freedom of assembly).
However, protests can turn unlawful if:
The assembly incites violence,
Blocks public way,
Threatens public safety,
Or its common object becomes unlawful as per Section 141 IPC.
Balancing Fundamental Rights and Public Order
Courts have consistently balanced the right to assemble peacefully with the state’s duty to maintain public order.
The state can regulate or prohibit assemblies if there is a reasonable threat to law and order.
Use of force to disperse unlawful assemblies must be proportionate and lawful.
Key Provisions Relevant to Unlawful Assemblies During Protests
Sections 141–145 IPC: Define unlawful assembly and related offences.
Section 129 of CrPC: Empowers police to disperse unlawful assemblies.
Section 144 CrPC: Prohibits unlawful assembly in urgent cases.
Article 19(1)(b) & (c): Right to assemble peacefully and to form associations.
Important Case Laws on Unlawful Assemblies During Protests
1. Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 124
Facts:
The case dealt with the constitutionality of restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that the right to assemble peacefully is fundamental and cannot be curtailed unless there is a clear danger to public order.
Significance:
Established the principle that mere apprehension or fear is insufficient to restrict assemblies; there must be a clear and present danger.
2. Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 1166
Facts:
Questioned the validity of preventive detention based on participation in protests.
Judgment:
Court held that the state’s power to restrict assembly must be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily. Unlawful assembly must be proved.
Significance:
Protection against arbitrary use of preventive detention during protests.
3. S. G. Vombatkere v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1967 SC 1919
Facts:
Dispersal of an unlawful assembly by police.
Judgment:
Court laid down guidelines that police must use minimal force and only as last resort to disperse unlawful assemblies.
Significance:
Set parameters for lawful use of force during protests.
4. Arup Bhuyan v. State of Assam, (2011) 8 SCC 342
Facts:
Police action against protesters in Assam; allegations of excessive force.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court stressed that the right to protest is fundamental but not absolute; however, excessive or indiscriminate force by police is unlawful.
Significance:
Emphasized proportionality and accountability in policing protests.
5. Bhagat Singh v. State (Delhi Administration), AIR 1980 SC 898
Facts:
Concerned the right to protest peacefully and limitations imposed by the state.
Judgment:
Held that peaceful protest is a fundamental right, but state can regulate time, place, and manner if necessary to maintain public order.
Significance:
Upheld reasonable restrictions on protest under Article 19(3).
6. In Re: Imposition of Section 144 CrPC in Nalagarh (2020) Delhi HC
Facts:
The High Court reviewed the imposition of Section 144 (prohibitory orders) during protests.
Judgment:
Ruled that such prohibitory orders must be based on concrete and specific intelligence, not vague apprehensions.
Significance:
Guarded against misuse of Section 144 to curb legitimate protests.
7. Prakash Singh Badal v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 1811
Facts:
Reviewed state’s action in dispersing protests during political unrest.
Judgment:
Court held that unlawful assembly status requires common object and intention, and not mere congregation.
Significance:
Distinguished between lawful protests and unlawful assemblies based on intent.
Summary Table: Key Principles from Case Laws
| Case | Key Issue | Legal Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Romesh Thappar | Freedom of assembly vs public order | Clear danger needed to restrict |
| Kameshwar Prasad | Preventive detention during protests | State’s power must be reasonable |
| Vombatkere | Police dispersal of unlawful assembly | Use minimal and necessary force |
| Arup Bhuyan | Excessive police force | Proportionality in law enforcement |
| Bhagat Singh | Right to protest | Reasonable restrictions valid |
| Nalagarh Case | Imposition of Section 144 | Must be based on specific intelligence |
| Prakash Singh Badal | Defining unlawful assembly | Requires common unlawful object |
Conclusion
Unlawful assemblies during protests are those gatherings whose common object is illegal, as defined under Section 141 IPC.
Courts have stressed protection of the right to peaceful assembly, while allowing the state to regulate assemblies where there is a clear threat to public order.
Police must act proportionately while dispersing unlawful assemblies, ensuring minimal force.
Preventive measures like Section 144 must be based on concrete grounds to avoid misuse.
The judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding democratic rights while balancing the need for law and order.
RELATED Blog
0 comments