Kerala High Court Directs State To Comply With Previous Directions To Prevent Unlawful Protests In Public Spaces

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State machinery to comply with the directions issued by the Apex court as well as the High Court time and again regarding the controlling of unlawful protests, campaigns, and other such assembly of people being staged at public spaces meant for public use. 

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Murali Purushothaman was considering a public interest litigation seeking the issuance of further directions to the competent State and Police authorities to remove unlawful assemblies of people around the Raj Bhavan and State Secretariat areas, Thiruvananthapuram, and thus formulate guidelines with respect to the earmarking of certain public areas in the State for the purpose of holding mass assemblies.

The Court observed that there was already an Apex Court decision, a Division Bench decision of the High Court, as well as a Circular issued by the State government on August 16, 2021, in this regard. It noted that the Government had taken note of the statutory provisions in various enactments, and adopted several measures to ensure the enforcement of orders of the Apex Court since 2006 and related orders of the Kerala High Court. 

"...General directions as prayed for cannot be issued...In such circumstance, we direct the respondents to comply with the directions issued by the Apex court as well as this court from time to time in this regard, and strictly implement the circular dated 16.8.2021 in letter and spirit," the Court observed while disposing the petition. 

It was the case of the petitioners that various organizations and political parties were staging protests, and demonstrations in public places, including footpaths, thereby causing serious inconvenience to general public and the commercial and other establishments set up at such places. It was pointed out by the petitioners that the police and other law enforcement authorities had been constantly failing and omitting to prevent unlawful assemblies from being staged in the areas around the Secretariat and the Raj Bhavan when there were other areas in and around the city which could be earmarked for the said purpose, such as, the Thycaud Police Ground, Shanmugham beach, Puthirikkandam Maidan, Poojappura Maidan, and others. 

It was also pointed out that there had been instances wherein campaigns or protests on footpaths, which initially started on temporary basis, soon attained the nature of permanence, with sheds and other structures being erected, which gradually become permanent constructions, causing hindrance to the general public using footpath. 

The Counsels also drew the attention of the Court to various statutory provisions in this regard such as Sections 2 (1), 3, 4, and 5 of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011. The Counsels further drew the attention of the Court to the previous interim order dated June 8, 2021issued by another Division Bench, the Division Bench decision in Satheesh v. The Travancore Devaswom Board & Ors.(2021) dated November 18, 2021, as well as the Apex Court decision in Union of India v. State of Gujarat & Ors. 

On the other hand, the State Attorney N. Manoj Kumar argued that the Government had taken all earnest steps to comply with the directions of the Apex Court and the High Court to prevent encroachment of any nature on the on the right of way or pedestrian facilities on public roads. As such, it was argued that there was no requirement to formulate and issue guidelines with respect to earmarking certain public areas in the State for the purpose of holding mass assemblies including protests, and campaigns. The Circular issued by the State Government dated August 16, 2022, in this regard, was also placed before the Court. 

It is in this context that the Court observed that the general directions prayed for could not be issued, considering the factual circumstances, and the measures taken by the State, and thus disposed the petition. 

The petitioners were represented by Advocates Shashank Devan, Adarsh Kumar, K.M. Aneesh, and Biju Varghese Abraham. 

Case Title: The Trivandrum Chamber of Commerce and Industry & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 196

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment