The Hon'ble Supreme Court on 7th October 2020 in the case of Amit Sahni v. Commissioner Of Police & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.- 3282 of 2020), said that occupying public places like Shaheen Bagh for protests is not acceptable and such a space cannot be occupied "indefinitely". A bench comprising Justices SK Kaul, Krishna Murari, and Hrishikesh Roy held the Shaheen Bagh movement began as a protest but caused inconvenience to commuters. 

Soon after the enactment of The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 there was a huge protest across the Nation and majorly in Delhi, wherein, Shaheen Bagh became the epicenter of the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act as mostly women, some with young children, staged a sit-in protest there for over three months. The petition was originally filed in Delhi High Court which was on its very first day disposed off. The grievance stated that the persons opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act and National Register of Citizens (the details of which were yet to be propounded), had adopted a method of protest which resulted in the closure of the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, including the Okhla underpass since 15-12-2019. The petitioner, Amit Sahni submitted that the public roads could not be permitted to be encroached upon in this manner and therefore, a direction should be issued to clear the same.

The issue under consideration was "Whether occupying Public Place for Protests valid under Article 19(1)?" The Court said that the present case was not even of a protest taking place in an undesignated area, but was a blockage of a public way which caused grave inconvenience to commuters. High Court must have monitored the case rather than disposing off the writ petition and creating a fluid situation. Thus, the Apex Court felt no hesitation in coming to a conclusion that such kind of occupation of public ways whether at the site in question or anywhere else for protests is not acceptable and the administration ought to take actions to keep the areas clear of encroachment or obstruction and hence the petition was disposed of leaving the parties bearing their own costs.

Justice SK Kaul firstly considered that this Covid-19 pandemic has helped in a great way in clearing out the gathering at Shaheen Bagh which has by time seem to be deviating from its goal in the absence of proper leadership. Also, stating the case of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India & Anr. , the court agreed with the judgment which emphasized the principle of balancing the interest of the residents in the area vis-à-vis the interests of protestors. Justice SK Kaul stated that the Fundamental rights do not exist in isolation and have to be balanced with every other contrasting interest.   

This news has been reported by Daisey Pallavi