Justice M.R. Mengdey, delivering a detailed judgment in Navdeep Mathur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat on December 4, 2025, has not only quashed all the impugned prohibitory orders, including a 2025 notification under Section 37 of the Gujarat Police Act, but also issued binding directions to the State: future prohibitory orders must be widely publicised through social media and other accessible platforms, as publication only in the official gazette is inadequate and inaccessible to the public. He held that the State had “clearly circumvented” legal protections designed to prevent exactly this kind of prolonged, opaque restriction on public assembly.

Section 144 cannot be a “standing order”: Court questions years of continuous restrictions

The petitioners, peaceful protestors against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019, argued that they were prosecuted for violating Section 144 — a provision they never knew had been imposed. The reason became clear once the Court examined the records: from 2016 to 2019, Ahmedabad Police issued one Section 144 order after another, often overlapping, ensuring the city was almost perpetually under prohibitory restrictions. The Court found this argument fully substantiated.

The Court found this deeply problematic:

• No material facts were recorded in the orders
• No emergent circumstances were demonstrated
• No prior inquiry, as required by law, was carried out
• No notice was issued to affected citizens except in supposed “emergencies”
• No attempt was made to use less restrictive measures

This, the Court said, reduced a temporary emergency provision into a standing administrative tool — precisely what Supreme Court precedents warn against.

The judgment shows a clear concern: Ahmedabad Police had normalised an emergency provision, issuing one order after another—sometimes even overlapping—and effectively creating a continuous bar on public assembly for years. As the Court held:

“The material available on record indicates that the Respondent authorities continued to issue Notifications under S.144 of the Code one after the other. Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner is right in contending that, on occasions, the subsequent Notification was issued even when the earlier notification was holding the field.” (Para 13)

Such a practice, the Court said, circumvented Section 144(4), which caps the duration of an order at two months unless extended by the State Government. Notably, the State never once invoked its power to extend any of these notifications; instead, the police simply kept reissuing fresh ones.

“No reasons, no facts, no transparency”: Judicial scrutiny exposes procedural vacuum

Justice Mengdey emphasised the principles laid down in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, Gulam Abbas v. State of UP, and Acharya Jagdishwaranand. The law requires:

1. Material facts to be recorded
2. Reasoned satisfaction of the need for immediate action
3. Prior inquiry, unless a genuine emergency prevents it
4. Temporary, tightly-tailored restrictions

But the Court found that none of the Section 144 notifications examined contained reasons, factual foundations, or evidence of emergent circumstances.

“As per the settled legal position, these powers being amenable to the judicial review and scrutiny, exercise of it, requires to appear reasonable and therefore, the authorities exercising these powers are also required to give their reasons for the same. The Notifications questioned in the present petition do not bear any reasons given by the authorities for issuing the same. When, by exercise of powers under S.144 of the Code, the fundamental rights or constitutional rights of a class of citizens are being affected, the exercise needs to be transparent. The scheme of the provision of S.144 of the Code itself makes it clear that the authority exercising these powers is required to come to a conclusion that it is necessary to exercise these powers to prevent disturbance to public peace and tranquillity.” (Para 9)

“The impugned notifications do not mention any such material facts. The safeguards and procedure prescribed in the Section are not an empty formality. Their strict adherence is mandatory as the impugned notifications propose to impose restrictions upon the citizens affecting their fundamental rights.” (Para 9)

By affecting fundamental rights without a factual basis, the State had acted in “utter disregard of the safeguards” built into the law.

Failure to use other lawful measures: State cannot label every gathering a threat

A crucial aspect of the judgment is the Court’s reminder that dissent—peaceful protest—is a constitutionally protected exercise of democratic freedom. Section 144 may be imposed only when other methods fail and only as a last resort. Before invoking it, authorities must try less intrusive methods of maintaining public order. Yet the State could not produce evidence showing any such effort.

The Court made this explicit:

“Therefore, prior to resorting to exercise of powers under S.144 of the Code, it was incumbent upon the Respondent authorities to take recourse to the other measures available to them under the law for maintenance of peace and tranquillity and it was only when those measures were found to be insufficient, the powers in question could have been exercised. There is nothing on record to indicate that the Respondent authorities had even taken recourse to the other measures and it was only upon their failure that the powers in question were exercised.” (Para 12.1)

The repeated, blanket restrictions therefore failed the test of proportionality, necessity, and reasonableness.

Court also strikes down the 2025 Ahmedabad Police Commissioner’s order under Section 37 of the Gujarat Police Act

The judgment goes beyond the Section 144 regime. Petitioners pointed out that even after the practice of constant Section 144 orders was discontinued, the State simply switched to issuing equally broad prohibitions under Section 37 of the Gujarat Police Act.

The Court closely examined the Commissioner’s November 3, 2025 notification, which cited vague allegations of violent gatherings in “certain police station areas” but did not specify which areas, when the incidents occurred, or why the entire city needed to be restricted.

The Court concluded the State had:

• Provided no nexus between the facts alleged and the sweeping prohibition imposed
• Curtained legitimate protest across Ahmedabad
• Failed to target actual offenders, instead opting for a city-wide ban that punished peaceful citizens

The same violated principles set out in George Fernandes v. State of Maharashtra, which requires a proximate, rational connection between the threat perceived and the restrictions imposed. Blanket bans fail this test.

“These observations would apply to the facts of the case on hand as well as the authorities concerned have miserably failed in demonstrating any such rationale and proximate connection or nexus between the prohibition sought to be imposed with the necessity for prevention of public order.” (Para 20)

“The aforesaid discussion would make it clear that the powers have been exercised by the respondent authorities in utter disregard of the safeguards provided for exercise of the powers in question. Therefore, the exercise of powers by the authorities appears to be arbitrary in the present case. Therefore, the notification in question including the notification of the Police Commissioner dated 3^rd November 2025, are violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioners and therefore, are liable to be quashed and set aside.” (Para 21)

Adjudication despite expiry of orders

The State argued that all the notifications had “expired” and therefore no adjudication was necessary. The Court rejected this. Justice Mengdey emphasised that citizens were still facing prosecution for alleged violation of these notifications, and therefore the validity of the orders directly impacted their liberty.

“It is argued that the Notifications have lived their lives. However, there would be many including the Petitioners, who would be facing prosecution for violation of these Notifications. Therefore, even if the Notifications have lived their lives and are no more in force today, their validity is required to be considered, as, if the same is not done, the Petitioners and many others, would be facing prosecution for violation of the Notification which stands declared arbitrary. Therefore, these Notifications were required to undergo the judicial scrutiny even after their expiry.” (Para 23)

This ensures that criminal proceedings arising from unconstitutional notifications do not continue.

Publicity failure: Official gazette is not enough in the digital era

One of the most important directions in the judgment relates to transparency.

The State claimed that the orders were “widely publicised.” The Court disagreed, noting that the petitioners had demonstrated that the public had no meaningful way to know such orders were in force at all.

Justice Mengdey observed:

“In the present era, mere publication of such Notifications or orders in the official gazette would not be sufficient. Moreover, the public at large has no access to such official gazette. In the era, where several modes of mass communication, including social media platforms are available, it is incumbent upon the Respondent authorities to publish such Notifications / Orders by using such modes. While quashing and setting aside the Notifications impugned in the present petition as well as the Notification dated 3.11.2025 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City being violative of fundamental rights of the citizens, the Respondent Authorities are hereby directed that, in future, while exercising such powers available under BNSS or Section 37 of the G.P.Act, due care shall be taken for adhering to the procedural aspects and the inherent safeguards required for exercising such powers and the Notifications / Orders issued under these provisions shall be given wide publicity on social media to make the public at large aware about it.” (Para 25)

The Court therefore directed:

• Mandatory publication of all Section 163 BNSS / Section 37 GP Act orders
• On social media, websites, and modern communication platforms
• In addition to regular modes
• To ensure actual public awareness and compliance

This is a major structural direction that significantly alters how prohibitory orders must be disseminated in Gujarat going forward.

A corrective moment for democratic policing

The judgment is a firm reminder that:

• Section 144 cannot be normalised
• Perpetual restrictions on peaceful assembly are unconstitutional
• The State must provide reasons, facts, inquiry, and evidence
• Blanket city-wide bans are disproportionate
• Citizens must be informed through accessible means
• Transparency and accountability are essential before curtailing democratic freedoms

The High Court’s intervention decisively pulls back an executive practice that had been allowed to operate unchecked for nearly a decade.

Conclusion: A decisive reaffirmation of democratic freedoms

By quashing the impugned notifications—both under Section 144/163 and Section 37—the High Court has sent a clear signal that public order powers cannot be used casually or mechanically to stifle dissent.

The ruling enhances procedural safeguards, demands transparency, and restores constitutional balance at a time when administrative reliance on prohibitory orders has become routine across many Indian cities.

The Gujarat High Court’s directions will now require every future invocation of Section 163 BNSS or Section 37 GP Act to satisfy:

• Reason-based scrutiny
• Evidence-based justification
• Prior exploration of lesser restrictive alternatives
• Wide public dissemination for awareness

A crucial precedent, the judgment stands as a robust defence of the right to protest and the constitutional promise that emergency powers must remain exceptional, temporary, and accountable—not a default policing mechanism.

The complete judgment may be read here:

Related:

Does imposition of Sec. 144 indicate Saffronisation of TN state machinery?

Gujarat High Court Widened Anti-Conversion Law: ‘Victims’ can be prosecuted as offenders

The post Gujarat High Court calls out “routine emergency”, strikes down years of Section 144 orders, demands transparency in all future restrictions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“As far as law is concerned you cannot prohibit peaceful protest. Can state proceed on the assumption that every protest will be violent?”

-Justice Abhay S Oka, the then Chief Justice of Karnataka

On February 14, the Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Jay Sengupta set aside orders prohibitory orders imposed in West Bengal’s Sandeshkhali in the wake of unrest due to alleged sexual harassment of women and illegal land grabbing in the area by miscreants allegedly from the ruling political dispensation. The said order had been issued under Section 144 Code of Criminal Procedure, which prohibits assembly of four or more people in an area.

While quashing the said order, the single bench held that using such powers that have an effect on the fundamental rights of the citizens of India should be done with extra caution and concrete reasoning. As per a report in the LiveLaw, in the order, the bench stated that “The atrocities on the villagers by three prime miscreants belonging to the ruling political dispensation, as alleged, are absolutely repulsive and heart wrenching. Non-arresting of the prime miscreants and their accomplices coupled with restriction on free movement of the villagers, at least in terms of Section 144 of the Code, may pose undue harassment to the inhabitants of the area and make them more vulnerable to further atrocities, especially in view of the peculiar geography of the place. Such promulgation has to be done by exercising more care and circumspection and surely, with a better reasoning. After all we are dealing with the rights of the citizens of the country.”

Furthermore, in dealing with the 144 CrPC order, the Court particularly noted that the same order broadly referred to the tension in the area while not mentioning the exact nature of the illegality or apprehended danger had not been discussed, making the same “bald and ritualistic reference to the possibility of breach of peace.”

Observing the aforementioned, the bench also held that based upon the Supreme Court precedents on the test of promulgating S.144 CrPC orders, the High Court could find no such proper satisfaction of tests having been recorded in the present case.

As per the order, the court noted that no material had been placed on record stating why the entire Sandeshkhali police station area should be covered with the order. According, the Calcutta High Court bench then set aside the order imposing restrictions under Section 144 CrPC.

Notably, on February 13, a separate single judge bench of the High Court comprising Justice Apurba Sinha Ray had also taken suo moto cognizance of newspaper reports on the matter of alleged sexual harassment of women living in Sandeshkhali, West Bengal, and tribal lands that had been forcibly taken over.

No setting aside of prohibitory orders, only calls for amicable settle by Punjab and Haryana High Court

Sadly, the same stand was not taken by the division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with the petition filed over the use of excessive obstructive actions by the State and Union governments in dealing with those farmers planning to participate in the farmers protest taking place in Delhi. The bench of Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji rather urged the petitioners and the respondents to try “for an amicable settlement”.

The hearing of this petition took place on February 13, the day that farmers from the states of Punjab and Haryana were supposed to travel to Delhi as a part of their ‘Chalo Delhi’ march to raise demand for  a law guaranteeing minimum support price (MSP) for their produce along with six other demands, which include implementation of the Swaminathan Commission’s recommendations that provide for safeguarding the interest of small farmers and addressing the issue of increasing risk overtaking agriculture as a profession, pensions for farmers and farm labourers, farm debt waiver, withdrawal of police cases and “justice” for victims of the Lakhimpur Kheri violence also form a part of the demands made. To prevent the farmers from joining this protest, the state of Haryana employed many tactics, from sealing of borders, putting up cement barricades on National Highways, to imposing prohibitory orders, deploying para-military, imposing internet shutdowns and even withholding ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) accounts. Yesterday, videos of Haryana police firing rubber pellets, using water cannons and dropping tear gases through drones at the farmers also surfaced.

Notably, two PILs (Public Interest Litigations) had been filed in the High Court. in one of the petitions, the petitioner had assailed Haryana government’s decision to seal its borders in order to prevent the agitators from entering the State and moving to Delhi. On the other hand, the second PIL was against protestors, stating that they have unauthorisedly blocked state and national highways.

In the said hearing, the bench emphasised that the protestors were granted the right to move around freely in the country through Article 19 of the Constitution, while, in the same breath, it added that State government also has the duty to protect its citizens and ensure that no inconvenience is caused to them.

As per a report in the LiveLaw, the bench then observed “There has to be balance in fundamental right to speech and expression, none of the rights are in isolation. The cautionary should be kept in mind and issue should be resolved amicably…All parties in the present dispute should make efforts to sit down and solve the problem and area should be identified by states to protest.”

With this, the division bench issued notices to the Union government as well as the governments of Punjab, Haryana and Delhi. Additionally, the bench asked the State governments to determine protest sites until then.

No interim relief to the protesting farmers was granted by the bench. The next hearing in the matter has been set for February 15, 2024.

Related:

Farmers Protest: Braving tear gas, blockades, state obstructions, farmers journey towards Delhi to demand law on MSP

Farmers’ Protest: Physical repression, prohibitory orders, Delhi entry blocked – Déjà Vu?

Farmer leaders detained in Madhya Pradesh, made to sit at police stations, saw police raids at night- attempts to stop farmers from joining protest intensify

The post Section 144 order set aside in Calcutta High Court, no such relief by Punjab and Haryana High Court in farmer’s protest appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Former Chief Justice of India UU Lalit expressed serious concern over the perpetual and indiscriminate invocation of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Delhi police in the national capital. This provision confers vast and indiscriminate powers on magistrates, and in the case of a commissionerate like Delhi, on the police chiefs, to issue urgent, preventive directions, including orders prohibiting large gatherings, in anticipation of an escalation of hostility or any other emergent situation. Justice Lalit said:

“Section 144 confers emergency powers. The purpose of invoking it may be laudable, but where it is invoked in this fashion, it indicates the means to the end do not matter at all because the end itself is thought to be of such sterling quality. To condone this would be to confer on executives, who may be police officers, drastic powers. This kind of power in a country governed by rule of law and democracy is not acceptable.”

The Delhi police comes under the union of India’s ministry of home affairs (MHA).

The former CJI, Lalit was speaking on Saturday at a launch of areport titled ‘The Use and Misuse of Section 144 CrPC: An Empirical Analysis of all the Orders Passed in 2021 in Delhi’ by a group of Delhi-based advocates comprising Vrinda Bhandari, AbhinavSekhri, Natasha Maheshwari, and Madhav Aggarwal. The report establishes that emergency powers under Section 144 were exercised by the Delhi police as many as 6,100 times in 2021. Also in attendance at the event was senior advocate Rebecca John. 

Terming the report an ‘eye-opener’, Justice Lalit said while the ‘regular’ logic for issuing such prohibitory orders or the ‘regular’ areas in which they are supposed to be exercised were justified, such a power could not be utilised for a purpose not envisioned by the law. When asked about the imposition of Section 144 to curb protests and dharnas, Justice Lalit said,

“Participating in peaceful protests is your constitutional right. No one can deny that.” However, he accepted that the police had reasons to be ‘extra vigilant’ during protests to prevent an escalation of violence. He said that the imposition of Section 144 during the pandemic to ensure social distancing was also justified in view of the urgent need to prevent the virus from spreading. “One can understand these. But how can normal business ventures be sought to be curtailed or to be regulated through the modality of Section 144?” The report reveals that the Delhi police issued orders under Section 144 for a slew of reasons apart from curbing threats to public order, including installation of CCTV cameras, regulation of businesses and services through record and registration requirements, regulation of courier services, prohibition of consumption of tobacco in hookah parlours, etc. “If you want, for instance, to have CCTV cameras in various places, including ATMs, Section 144 certainly is not the fulcrum or the foundation on which you can build this edifice,” Justice Lalit added.

“The power must be exercised in a manner known to the law, by the competent authority, and for the intent and purpose for which it was conferred,” Justice Lalit firmly said. While Section 144 directions could be challenged, litigation was time-consuming and expensive, the former judge pointed out. “It is not as if these orders pinched the shoe at every juncture compelling people to move the court, but rather posed a potential threat for prosecution, which could result in imprisonment for up to two years.” He added, “This is the kind of threat to which they are vulnerable. There is a sword hanging over their head.”

Finally, Justice Lalitopined that the report be placed before lawmakers or before a court of law. While the validity of the legislation had already been upheld in BabulalParate(1959)and MadhuLimaye(1970), the mechanism of public interest litigation, he suggested, could be employed to point out to a court of law that the premise on which the legislation was held to be valid is “being played around with”. It may be highlighted that the provision is being used for purposes not envisioned when it was enacted or subsequently, upheld, Justice Lalit said, “If someone were to take this matter to the court, I think some solace could be secured.”

The detailed speech and event was reported in LiveLaw.

Related:

Free legal aid does not mean poor legal aid: Justice UU Lalit

The post ‘Peaceful Protest a Constitutional Right, perpetual invocation of section 144 concerning”: Former CJI UU Lalit appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Jamia Millia Islamia has asked its students and teachers not to assemble in and around it’s campus as the Delhi police has imposed restrictions under section 144 of the CrPC in the entire Okhla area, PTI reports. In a notice issued late on Monday, September 26, the chief proctor of the university said the SHO of the Jamia Nagar police station has informed that the restrictions have been imposed since September 19 as information was received that some people or groups may indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of peace. Only last week, there had been a protests when student leader, Safoora Zargar, out on bail, was refused entry on the campus.

On September 27, the SHO further said that the restrictions would be in place in the entire Okhla (Jamia Nagar) area till November 17, the notice added. The police have, however, denied that the order is related to the ongoing action against the Popular Front of India (PFI).  Section 144 of the CrPC prohibits the assembly of four or more people in an area. Violation of the order is punishable under section 188 of the IPC.

 In view of the order, all students, and teaching and non-teaching staff of Jamia Millia Islamia are advised not to assemble in and outside the campus in groups or as part of any march, agitation, dharna or meeting, the notice by the chief proctor stated. The notice came a day after Jamia’s teachers announced a peaceful protest march.

Last week, days after Jamia Millia Islamia cancelled student activist, Safoora Zargar’s Ph.D admission, the university coupled this with “banning” her entry in the campus for unnecessary agitation on irrelevant and objectionable subjects. In a justification for this latest action, the Chief Proctor of the university said that Zargar was “using” the students of Jamia as a platform to fulfil malicious and political agenda’ which has led the university to issue the order. Zargar was a M.Phil student at Jamia Millia Islamia and the media coordinator of the Razamia Coordination Committee.

Zargar, was in 2020, was jailed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act from April 10 to June 24, 2020 in the alleged conspiracy case of Delhi riots 2020, for making provocative speeches on February 23, 2020. She was released on bail in June 2020 on humanitarian and medical grounds as she was expecting her first child.

The university, Jamia Milia Islamia stated officially that Safoora Zargar was involved in organizing agitations, protests and marches on the campus against irrelevant and objectionable issues to disturb the peaceful academic environment along with a few outside students.

“It has been observed that Ms. Safoora Zargar (ex student) has been involved in organizing agitations, protests and marches on the campus against the irrelevant and objectionable issues to disturb the peaceful academic environment with few students who are mostly outsiders. She is instigating innocent students of the university and trying to use the university platform for her malafide political agenda along with some other students. Further, she is hampering the normal functioning of the institution. In view of above, the competent authority, for maintaining peaceful academic environment across the campus, has approved campus ban on ex student Ms. Safoora Zargar with immediate effect,” reads the order issued by the university.

Related:

Jamia cancels Safoora Zargar’s PHD then bans her from entering JMI campus
AISA students detained for decrying bulldozer raj
Jamia Millia Islamia students protest Jahangirpuri demolitions

The post Delhi police impose section 144 around Jamia, Okhla, student assembly restricted appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Ajmer district administration imposed Section 144, banned flags bearing religious symbols and loudspeakers in religious and public places from April 7, following violence in Karauli, reported the Free Press Journal.

Rajasthan’s Karauli city has been in a state of turmoil since April 2, when right-wing outfits like the Vishva Hindu Parishad(VHP), the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bajrang Dal took out a rally during Nav Samvatsar. The ensuing stone-pelting and property damages in minority community areas has put nearby regions including Ajmer on high alert.

While authorities in the violence-hit region extended curfew upto April 10, 2022, Ajmer authorities thought it safe to impose Section 144 as a precautionary measure during upcoming festival. In an order published on Thursday, District Collector Ansh Deep said that miscreants attempt to disturb communal harmony by raising flags with religious symbols on public property such as government buildings, undertakings, rest houses, public parks, circle electric and telephone poles, etc. during religious occasions. As such, he called for preventive action to maintain social harmony and public peace.

“In view of the above circumstances, I [prohibit] the installation of flags with religious insignia on public property in the entire urban and rural area of Ajmer without any competent sanction… If a person violates the above orders, he may be prosecuted under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code,” said Ansh.

The order will be in effect for a month from Thursday 10 AM. Further, the administration also banned the use of loudspeakers in public and religious places to “curb noise pollution”. This includes DJ events during functions. As per the order, anyone wanting to use these items will have to take permission form the Sub-District Magistrate in advance. This permission will not be given for use between 10 PM and 6 AM.

Recently, right-wing groups and supporters have started a vehement hate campaign against the use of loudspeakers by mosques. Notably, there was a controversy in Maharashtra where Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) Chief Raj Thackeray lashed out against the Muslim community and demanded speakers twice the height of the religious structure be placed outside mosques to play Hanuman Chalisa. Days later, Karnataka Hindutva groups called for a ban of loudspeakers in mosques.

Meanwhile, tensions in Karauli continue. On Friday, The Cognate’s Delhi Correspondent Ghazala Ahmad and her colleague Ahmed Kasim were allegedly manhandled by the local police while trying to report on the previous week’s attacks. The two journalists later reported they were able to leave the area safely.

Update: We’ve safely managed to leave the place.

— Ghazala Ahmad (@ghazalaahmad5) April 8, 2022

Related:

Rajasthan: All you need to know about the Karauli violence
Right-wing’s dangerous obsession with mosques and dargahs peaks during Ramzan
Bajrang Muni Das openly threatens Muslim women with sexual assault
Vasant More rejects communalism, stands up to Raj Thackeray
857 communal riots in 2020 alone!
Gujarat:  Antarashtriya Hindu Parishad is stage for anti-Muslim abuse, trident distribution
The Kashmir Files: Right-wing outfits bring weapons inside theatres!
Why is this ‘Sangeet Som Sena’ allowed to roam free in UP?

The post Ajmer Collector bans crowds, religious flags and loudspeakers after Karauli violence appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Decades after the Babri Masjid demolition in Ayodhya on December 6, the day has always been one of high security protocol in Uttar Pradesh. However this year, one of the thickest security blankets envelops Mathura, as right-wing groups announced plans to perform Hindu rituals at Shahi Idgah mosque and install Hindu deity Krishna’s idol on December 6.

Mathura in western UP is revered as the birthplace of Hindu deity Krishna. It is also home to the Shahi Idgah, which is next to the Krishna janmabhoomi (the place where the deity is believed to have been born). 

According to reports the city is “resembling a fortress”, especially in the areas around the Shri Krishna Janmasthan Temple. Right-wing groups have been threatening to install an idol of Lord Krishna in the adjacent Shahi Idgah mosque on December 6.

According to ADG L&O UP Prashant Kumar the Police arrangements are statewide, “Parampara se hatkar koi bhi karyakram nahi karne diya jayega (no programmes apart from those done ‘as per tradition’ will be allowed)”. Security forces have been put on high alert to maintain peace, he informed the media.

ADG L&O UP Sri Prashant Kumar speaks about the statewide Police arrangements for the 6th December.
All field formations have been put on high alert to maintain absolute peace in the state & no diversion from established tradition shall be permitted. pic.twitter.com/S0vbfxX11n

— UP POLICE (@Uppolice) December 5, 2021

On December 6, reported India Today, after the right-wing groups announced their intentions, some Muslim groups have responded that they will “observe the Babri Masjid demolition anniversary to raise their concern.” A three-tiered security ring has been reportedly thrown around the Katra Keshav Dev area, where the temple and Shahi Idgah mosque are situated.

The security arrangements this year are being reported as  “unprecedented”. Usually the focus on this day had always been on Ayodhya, but Mathura has now found itself as the focus area of right-wing groups which are on overdrive, even as the state prepares for the Assembly elections next year.

According to news reports, every road connecting the town to the national and state highways has police barricades and India Today reported that “even the narrow gauge railway track that runs behind the temple-mosque complexes has been shut down.” 

Protest march or gathering in the city will also not be allowed as Section 144 has been imposed. No traffic will be allowed on roads leading to Sri Krishna Janambhoomi and adjoining Shahi Eidgah till Tuesday. Mathura Police has posted December 6 specific traffic guidelines for the city:

दिनांक 06 दिसम्बर, 2021 को मथुरा शहर की यातायात व्यवस्था निम्न प्रकार से रहेगी। pic.twitter.com/TEXiXXRrYT

— MATHURA POLICE (@mathurapolice) December 5, 2021

According to news reports the arrangements will remain in place even though some organisations and individuals have reportedly “called off their plans for the day”.

The Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha (ABHM) had called for a ‘jalabhishek’ anointing of a deity or holy spot, at the area they claim is the birthplace of Krishna, in Shahi Eidgah. However, they reportedly withdrew the call, and the police remained on alert with 2,000 police personnel, besides Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), stationed at the site for Monday. Police forces have been called from nearby districts as well, stated news reports adding that Mathura police had also conducted an anti-riot drill at Police Lines to assess its preparedness under SSP Mathura Dr Gaurav Grover and district magistrate Navneet Chahal.

“Section 144 of criminal procedure code is in force, and anybody violating prohibitory orders will be dealt with strictly. Police is fully geared to maintain peace and tranquillity and to instil fear amongst those having nefarious designs,” SSP Mathura told the media adding, “Denizens of Mathura are being asked to co-operate in security arrangements by not becoming part of any unlawful gathering or protest march and staying away from nuisance makers interested in spreading rumours. Vigil is being kept on social media, and the police cyber cell is all prepared to punish those interested in damaging peace and tranquillity in the city.” Police are also on alert in adjoining district Agra. 

Recently Uttar Pradesh’s Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya had publicly announced that “preparations were underway for the construction of a grand temple in Mathura” along the lines of what was being done in Ayodhya and Varanasi. He said, “A grand temple is being constructed in Ayodhya and Kashi, preparations are on for Mathura next.” It is now his pinned tweet.

अयोध्या काशी भव्य मंदिर निर्माण जारी है
मथुरा की तैयारी है #जय_श्रीराम #जय_शिव_शम्भू #जय_श्री_राधे_कृष्ण

— Keshav Prasad Maurya (@kpmaurya1) December 1, 2021

Related:

Hate Watch: UP Dy CM Keshav Prasad Maurya continues spewing anti-Muslim venom
Uttar Pradesh: Kairana back in the spotlight in the run up to Assembly Elections
Hate Watch: UP Dy CM Keshav Prasad Maurya adding fuel to the communal embers?
Krishna Janmabhoomi: Application before DM to stop namaaz at Shahi Idgah
Will install Krishna idol in Mathura mosque on December 6: Hindu Mahasabha
Are Kashi-Mathura mosques in the crosshairs of hardliners again? 

The post December 6: Mathura under thick security blanket as right wing groups had announced ‘plans’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

News from Tripura continues to report incidents that have the potential to lead to “breach of peace”. Section 144 has been imposed in Laxmipur and Kailashahar, after a group of unidentified miscreants allegedly vandalised a Kali temple in Kailashahar’s Kubjhar area under Laxmipur Gram Panchayat on Friday. According to EtvBharat this alleged vandalism sparked off tensions in the area and members of Hindu Jagaran Mancha and Hindu Yuva Bahini met the office of sub-divisional police officer (SDPO) Kailashahar Chandan Saha “demanding the immediate removal of officer-in-charge (OC) Partha Munda, who allegedly failed to ensure proper security to the temple.” 

ABVP leader allegedly attacked in Kailashahar 

In a separate incident, an ABVP leader was allegedly attacked in Kailashahar on the same day, reported EtvBharat. On the other hand, ABVP leader Shibaji Sengupta was injured, allegedly by a group of student leaders affiliated with Trinamool Chhatra Parishad and NSUI reported EtvBharat.

Shibaji Sengupta said that he had gone to check out information that some “student leaders of opposition parties were threatening the students of RKI school, Kailashahar” and there he reportedly “got involved in a heated altercation that later took a turn of physical assault and fistfights.” It was then that he was allegedly stabbed from behind, and could not see his attacker. He was referred to GBP hospital Agartala. District Magistrate Unakoti District Uttam Kumar Chakma told the media that the accused have been arrested and section 144 imposed in the area.

Citizens for Justice and Peace writes to National Commission for Minorities 

As anti-Muslim violence flares in Tripura, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) has written to the National Commission for Minorities (NCM) over the targeted attacks. Over the last few days, mosques have been allegedly vandalised by right-wing groups. Further, shops and houses owned by Muslims have also not been spared by these mobs who are allegedly carrying out attacks as a retaliation to the attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh.

During the Durga Puja festival in Bangladesh, incidents of vandalism were reported from Hindu temples which led to aggravated violence that left three people dead and dozens injured. The Bangladesh government was forced to deploy paramilitary forces in 22 districts. After this news surfaced, Tripura has been seeing “outbreaks of retaliatory targeted violence” where Muslims are being targeted and certain homegrown extremist groups are taking the law into their own hands. Muslim families have been living in fear and distress over the past few days. Over 15 mosques have been reportedly vandalised and shops owned by Muslims have been ransacked by goons.

Tripura High Court takes suo motu cognisance

The Tripura High Court has taken suo motu cognisance of the various reports of anti-minority violence in the state, and has asked the government to file its response by November 10. The court took note of the violence reported in various newspapers on October 26 in the districts of North Tripura, Unakoti as well as Sipahijala. The order read, “We direct the respondents [government] to file further affidavits before this Court on or before 10th November, 2021 specifically dealing with preventive measures they had taken or what is their plan of scuttling the design of stoking communal passion or to perpetrate in the violence.”

Related:

Anti Muslim violence in Tripura, HC takes suo motu cognisance
Delhi: Students, activists detained for protesting Tripura violence
Panisagar mosque safe and secure: Tripura Police
Tripura: Right-wing mobs vandalise mosques in response to the attack on 

The post Tripura: ABVP leader attacked, Section 144 imposed in 2 subdivisions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Fear and silence have gripped Uttar Pradesh in the wake of anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests. After The Hindu quoted a Benaras Hindu University (BHU) student in its stories where he mentioned that in the 365 days of 2019, Section 144 was imposed in the town of Varanasi for 359 days, General Secretary of the Congress, Priyanka Gandhi lashed out at the Prime Minister and his party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

https://twitter.com/priyankagandhi/status/1212670710121762816

On 359 out of 365 days in the year 2019, Section 144 was imposed in Varanasi town the P.M’s own constituency and he has the gall to say that people have nothing to fear?https://t.co/zsDkbNoszn

— Priyanka Gandhi Vadra (@priyankagandhi) January 2, 2020

After Gandhi’s tweet, media houses rushed to verify claims. A senior administrative official told the Hindustan Times, “Yes, the city remained under Section 144 CrPC for about 350 days in 2019 for various events and incidents.”

Neither denying nor confirming Priyanka’s allegation, Varanasi Additional District Magistrate (ADM) Vinod Kumar Singh told reporters, “After checking the records, we would only confirm. However, it may be possible because Varanasi is a religious city where festivals fall across the year and are celebrated on big scales.”

He told The Pioneer that it was wrong to assume that Varanasi had been put under prohibitory orders for a year and that the orders were only imposed on a need basis. “But we will enforce Section 144 during the forthcoming board examinations near all the centres. This should answer your question,” the SSP replied when asked if Section 144 was clamped in Varanasi for 359 days in 2019.

The holy city of Varanasi often sees the imposition of Sec 144. Currently too, the city is under prohibitory orders starting December 11, 2019 to February 5, 2020 for maintaining law and order during the UP Teachers Eligibility Test (UP TET), Christmas, New Year, Makar Sankranti, Republic Day and arrivals of VVIPs. Last time, it was imposed on October 16 and remained effective till December 9 for Guru Nanak Jyanti, Barawafat, Karthik Purnima, Dev Deepawali, Eid, bank and other competitive examinations.

Varanasi, which is the Constituency of the Prime Minister, also sees Section 144 being imposed a week before every visit by Modi, CM Yogi Adityanath or any other minister from the Centre. However, the frequency and the arbitrariness with which the orders are imposed has increased since 2018.

The government officials did not give an exact number on which the orders were imposed, they explained that because the city was a site for major festivals, it called for these orders. On being asked why that required restrictions that are specifically meant to control public disorder in troubled spots, nobody had an answer. When contacted by the The Telegraph, a government official said, “We haven’t counted how many days Section 144 was in force in which area of Varanasi. But it’s a pilgrimage town and the Prime Minister’s constituency, so we have to be alert all the time.”

He also said that the section was mostly not imposed across the entire city, was relaxed arbitrarily, exempted religious processions and bypassed areas like the Ganga ghat.

“Yes, the ban on assemblies is imposed 30 days before festivals like Maha Shivaratri, Ram Navami, Janmashtami and Muharram in some parts of the city. It’s also clamped around the universities and colleges five days before Republic Day and Independence Day. Nor do we ever allow gatherings near the Kashi Vishwanath temple. Section 144 is also imposed in the Lanka area (near the Banaras Hindu University main gate) whenever the students hold an agitation, for these mostly turn violent. These agitations go on round the year,” he added saying that orders were never imposed at the Ganga Ghat unless there was intimation of communal tension in the town.

Perhaps this was what Priyanka Gandhi was trying to say when she spoke about orders being imposed in the city saying, “the PM’s own constituency and he has the gall to say that people have nothing to fear?”

Her sentiment was echoed by Shatrudra Prakash, a member of the Samajwadi Party Legislative Council who told The Telegraph, “You can’t expect a democracy in Varanasi. The local officials proactively suppress the voice of the people on every issue. If there’s a whiff of an agitation, Section 144 is imposed. The way this section has been abused in Varanasi is alarming, although people do keep breaking the prohibitory orders.”

People from the city of Varanasi have told many news channels and publications that now, especially in the wake of anti-CAA protests in the city, people are fearing now than ever before to even step out on the streets. Currently, the Section 144 has been imposed there to quell these protests and people have reported policemen sitting by the roadside waiting to detain or arrest anyone they feel is violating the orders.

Journalists, professors and even the common people of the city say that they have seen a noticeable change in the political atmosphere of the city since 2014. A.K. Lari told The Hindu, “The tenor of political discussions in Varanasi changed after 2014. People do get fearful while expressing their opinion.”

BHU professors Brinda Paranjape and MP Ahirwar also said that the bonhomie among the people seems to have been “seriously threatened and throttled” since 2014. They said, “After 2014, the colour of the city and University has become saffron. BHU has now become the shelter home of the Sanghis.”

In December 2019, the UP police has arrested 218 persons including students and 69 activists in Varanasi in the light of anti-CAA protests.

Related:

UP sees the worst of Police Brutality
Why is Police demanding people’s documents in Benaras
Allahabad HC asks for evidence of advocate Mohammed Shoaib’s arrest
NAPM releases report on state repression of protestors in UP
NHRC pulls up UP police for complaints on rights violations, deaths by police firing
Fact finding report reveals excesses by Meerut police against Muslims

The post Is Varanasi being stifled under Section 144? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Karnataka High Court’s response in the PILs filed by Congress Rajya Sabha MP Rajeev Gowda, Jayanagar MLA Sowmya Reddy, and others has given some hope to the anti-CAA and anti-NRC protestors. The case was heard on December 20.

The PIL has challenged the detention of persons including historian Ramachandra Guha as they had defied the prohibitory orders under section 144 of the CrPC

The Karnataka High Court bench comprising of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur reprimanded the government and questioned it, “Are you (state) going to ban each and every protest? How can you cancel permission previously granted following due course of process?… Can the state proceed on the assumption that every protest will become violent? Can an author or artist not hold a peaceful protest if he disagrees with any decision of the government.”

The bench has decided to look into the legality of the prohibitory orders implemented from December 19 to 21. The Bench observed that the cause of the protest is not a matter of concern to the court as much as the decision-making process that imposed the prohibitory orders, since these orders curtail fundamental rights of citizens. “It should be checked whether any permission to organisers previously granted to hold a peaceful protest was revoked in wake of Sec 144 order, (and if it) can be considered if they apply for fresh permission,” the court said.

The Attorney General, Prabhuling K Navadgi argued that the police had only acted on intelligence reports received by it that indicated that the protests could turn into a law and order situationand that people from Kerala had infiltrated into the state. He said that the police were only acting to safeguard public property.

The Indian Express reported that apart from Guha, several protesters including Shivajinagar Congress MLA Rizwan Arshad were detained by police, and released later. The detentions prompted Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa to warn police against taking the law into their hands “without reason”.

Related:

Karnataka HC slams govt: ‘You will ban each protest? Can’t an author speak up?’
India’s 200 million Muslims could be affected by CAA-NRC: US report
Yediyurappa reneges on compensation promise to anti-CAA protesters?
Bengaluru to hold NPR in two phases
‘Protestors should pay’: Karnataka to seize properties of alleged ‘rioters’
Bangalore roars in unity against the CAA and NRC
Controlling Dissent: Ramchandra Guha, left leaders detained for anti-CAA protests
K’taka BJP leader warns anti-CAA protesters of ‘Godhra-like’ situation

The post “Are you going to ban each and every protest?” K’taka HC raps govt appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The entire order may be read here:

The post Section 144 imposed in Kargil appeared first on SabrangIndia.