Citizens Have Right To Know Rules Under Which They Are Refused Permission To Hold Peaceful Protests: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has held that citizens have a right to know the rules and regulations under which they are denied the permission to hold peaceful protests. It added that refusal of the Police to publicize such rules amounts to "killing and smothering" the very purpose of the Right to Information Act."Right to Information Act was enacted with the spirit that the democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable to be governed...Sec.2(f) with sec.3 and 4 of the Right to Information Act makes it mandatory for the authorities to furnish information and promote transparency. Had the petitioner been supplied with the reasons and the rules under which she was denied permission to protest in 2019, she would have had access to the law of the land and to the decision making process which could enable the petitioner to challenge such information."The petitioner, wanting to peacefully assemble sought permission for assembly and peaceful protest on 29.12.2019 between 5 p.m to 7 p.m. on foothpath of road adjacent to Kanoria Centre for Arts & Gufa of Ahmedabad. The petitioner was informed that the permission for such assembly and peaceful protest is not allowed and is rejected on the grounds of situation of law and order as well as problem of traffic. The petitioner in violation of the order did hold an assembly and was detained for a few hours. The petitioner addressed a letter to the respondent (Gujarat Police) asking for the copy of the complete rules framed under Sec.33 (1) (o) of the Police Act (under which the permission of the petitioner was processed) and secondly if a request was rejected, whether it was so done under any of the rules or regulations. The petitioner received a reply on 06.03.2020 that her request for information sought is refused. Hence, the petitioner challenged the said refusal on the ground of it being grossly bad, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice, Rule of Law & Democracy. Justice Biren Vaishnav held that on conjoint reading of Sec. 4(1)(b), 4(2), 4(3) and 4(4) of the Right to Information Act is that the petitioner is entitled and so the respondent is under a legal duty to publish informations specified in sec. 4(1)(b) of the Act and evidently, the petitioner is entitled to know the rules framed under Sec.33 of the Gujarat Police Act. It thus directed the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad to publish all the rules and orders framed under Sec.33 of the Gujarat Police Act on the website in the manner that the same are made available and accessible to the public.The court observed: "not only is the police authority empowered to regulate such conduct of people assembling and taking out processions in accordance with the rules framed under Sec.33 of the Act, but sub-section 6 of Sec.33 mandates publication of such rules or orders. These provisions have to be seen in light of certain provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Reading the preamble of the Right to Information Act, indicates that the Constitution of India has established a democratic republic. Democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning..."The court further stated that the petitioner in her right is entitled to a writ of mandamus for a direction to seek such information, especially when, it will help what is evidently the purpose of the RTI Act i.e. to receive information so as to know what is the procedure followed in the decision making process the norms set by it for the discharge of the functions by the State and the Rules and Regulations empowering such decision making process. In conclusion the court held: “In accordance with mandate under Section 4 of the RTI Act therefore and in light of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is entitled to the information so provided.” Hence, the petition is allowed with above directions. Case Title: Swati Rajiv Goswami v. Commissioner of Police, AhmedabadCase Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Guj) 11 Coram: Justice Biren Vaishnav Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Citizens Have Right To Know Rules Under Which They Are Refused Permission To Hold Peaceful Protests: Gujarat High Court

Udit Singh

Tags