BANO BEE Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this public interest litigation, the petitioner invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has called in question the legal substantiality and tenability of the order dated 6th July, 2010 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police whereby he has, in exercise of powers conferred on him under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'the Code') read with Notification No. 11036/1/08-UTL dated 31.10.2008 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi passed an order prohibiting certain activities.

(2.) It is urged in the petition that the Delhi Police has been issuing such prohibitory orders from time to time as a result of which the fundamental right to assemble peacefully under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution which includes holding peaceful dharna, demonstration, etc. has been destroyed. It is contended that the impugned order does not indicate any criteria for granting or refusing permission. It is completely left to the discretion of Delhi Police as a consequence of which the permission to hold dharna, public meetings in the entire prohibited area which is the centre of power and best suited for political dharna is denied.

(3.) It is averred that the petitioner is one of the members of 'Bhopal Gas Pidit Mahila Stationary Karamchari Sangh' who had come along with other activists to Delhi to raise a protest because of the failure of the Government of India to set up an empowered commission to look into the problems of the victims of toxic gases leak from the plant of Union Carbide in 1984, but the same has become unfruitful because of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police. Reference has been made to Section 144 to show that in total violation of the said provision, the Delhi Police have been issuing orders under Section 144, Cr.PC in a routine manner without there being any emergent situation. It is the case of the petitioner that the said orders create unreasonable restriction which affects the fundamental right of the petitioner. It is urged that the prohibitory orders are in total violation of Article 19(1)(a) and (b) and the same have been issued without any basis and thereby tantamounts to abuse of the process of the mandate contained in Section 144 of Cr.PC.