Introduction
The recent protests at Jantar Mantar during the “Chalo Sansad” rally demanding reforms in the National Testing Agency (NTA) have once again raised an important constitutional question: How far does the right to protest extend, and when can the police lawfully intervene?
For CLAT 2027 UG aspirants, this issue is highly relevant because it combines Fundamental Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, and Current Affairs. Questions based on protests, police powers, public order, and landmark Supreme Court judgments are frequently asked in the Legal Reasoning section.
At CLATSARTHY, we believe that understanding the balance between citizens’ rights and State authority is essential for mastering passage-based legal reasoning questions.
The Constitutional Right to Protest
The Indian Constitution guarantees every citizen the Right to Assemble Peaceably and Without Arms under Article 19(1)(b).
This right enables citizens to:
- Hold peaceful demonstrations.
- Organize rallies.
- Express disagreement with government policies.
- Participate in public movements.
The right to protest is considered an important pillar of democracy because it allows citizens to voice their opinions peacefully.
However, this right is not absolute.
Article 19(3): Reasonable Restrictions
Under Article 19(3), the State may impose reasonable restrictions on the right to assemble in the interests of:
- Public Order
- Sovereignty and Integrity of India
The word “reasonable” is crucial.
Authorities may regulate:
- Time of protests
- Place of demonstrations
- Route of marches
- Crowd management
However, they cannot use public order as an excuse to completely suppress peaceful dissent.
When Does a Peaceful Protest Become an Unlawful Assembly?
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) lays down the circumstances in which a gathering may become an unlawful assembly.
A group of five or more persons becomes an unlawful assembly when its common object includes:
- Using criminal force.
- Resisting lawful authority.
- Committing an offence.
- Disturbing public peace through unlawful means.
Importantly, a protest that begins peacefully can later become unlawful if the conduct of the participants changes.
Therefore, context plays a crucial role in determining legality.
Police Powers Under the BNSS
To maintain law and order, authorities frequently invoke Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
This provision empowers authorities to issue prohibitory orders in situations where public peace or safety is at risk.
If a crowd refuses to comply with a lawful order to disperse, the police may use force to restore order.
However, this authority is subject to constitutional safeguards.
Limits on Police Use of Force
Police powers are not unlimited.
Before using force, officers are expected to follow a graduated response:
- Persuasion
- Dialogue
- Warnings
- Opportunity to disperse voluntarily
Physical force should be used only when absolutely necessary.
Even then, the law requires the use of only the minimum force necessary to control the situation.
International policing principles also require that police action must be:
- Lawful
- Necessary
- Proportionate
These safeguards prevent arbitrary use of force against peaceful protesters.
Accountability During Crowd Control
The BNSS requires arresting officers to display proper identification during arrests.
However, legal experts have pointed out that the law does not expressly require similar identification for personnel engaged solely in crowd-control duties.
This has generated debate regarding transparency and accountability during large public demonstrations.
Landmark Supreme Court Judgments
Anita Thakur v. State of Jammu & Kashmir (2016)
The Supreme Court held that excessive police force violates Fundamental Rights.
The Court also ruled that victims of unlawful police action may be entitled to compensation from the State.
This judgment reinforces the principle that police powers must always remain proportionate.
Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018)
The Supreme Court observed that the government may regulate protests in the interest of public order.
However, authorities cannot impose a complete ban on peaceful demonstrations.
The judgment reaffirmed that the Right to Protest is an essential democratic freedom.
Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police (2020)
Popularly known as the Shaheen Bagh Case, this judgment balanced competing constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court held that:
- Peaceful dissent is constitutionally protected.
- Public roads cannot be occupied indefinitely.
- The rights of commuters and the general public must also be respected.
The judgment highlights that constitutional rights must coexist with the rights of others.
Why This Topic Is Important for CLAT 2027 UG
At CLATSARTHY, we recommend every CLAT aspirant study this topic carefully because it combines multiple legal concepts into a single issue.
It is relevant for:
- Constitutional Law
- Fundamental Rights
- Criminal Law
- Legal Reasoning
- Current Affairs
- Judicial Activism
- Public Order
- Police Powers
Passage-based questions may ask students to determine:
- Whether restrictions imposed by authorities are reasonable.
- Whether a gathering qualifies as an unlawful assembly.
- Whether police action satisfies the test of proportionality.
- Which Fundamental Rights are involved in a given situation.
CLATSARTHY Exam Tip
Whenever you encounter a CLAT passage on protests or public demonstrations, identify these four elements first:
- Is the assembly peaceful?
- Has the State imposed a reasonable restriction under Article 19(3)?
- Has the assembly become unlawful under the BNS?
- Was the police response necessary and proportionate?
Applying these principles systematically will help you solve Legal Reasoning questions with greater accuracy.
Conclusion
The relationship between the Right to Protest and Police Powers reflects the delicate balance that every constitutional democracy must maintain. Citizens enjoy the freedom to assemble and express dissent, but these freedoms coexist with the State’s responsibility to maintain public order.
The Constitution, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and the Supreme Court’s landmark judgments together establish that neither individual liberty nor State authority is absolute.
At CLATSARTHY, we simplify complex constitutional developments into exam-oriented notes so that CLAT aspirants can confidently apply legal principles in passage-based questions.
