N.P. NATHWANI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition relates to a very important question regarding basic human natural rights to hold a peaceful assembly of some lawyers who are invited by individual invitations to discuss civil liberties and the rule of law while the proclamation of emergency is in operation. On December 3, 1971 the President of India in exercise of the powers conferred upon under Article 352(1) of the Constitution of India by a proclamation of emergency declared that a grave emergency existed whereby the security of India was threatened by external aggression. While this proclamation of emergency was in operation, on June 25, 1975 by another proclamation of emergency issued under Article 352(1) of the Constitution the President of India declared that a grave emergency existed whereby the security of India was threatened by internal disturbance. After the proclamation of emergency declared by reason of danger to internal security, on June 27, 1975, the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay by his order issued under Section 37(5) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, (Bombay Act XXII of 1951) prohibited any assembly of five or more than five persons and any procession of any persons for a period of one week as specified in the order and he considered it necessary for the preservation of public order to prohibit any assembly of five or more than five persons and any procession of any persons in the area of Greater Bombay. Such orders were continued from time to time every week by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay. The last of such orders was issued by the Commissioner of Police for the duration of one week on October 1, 1975 and prohibition of assembly and procession was imposed for the period October 3, 1975 to October 10, 1975. On October 9, 1975 the Government of Maharashtra accorded sanction for ex -lending the period of prohibitory orders issued under Section 37(3) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 for a further period of one month with effect from October 10, 1975. In view of the said order, the order dated October 1, 1975 was continued by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, for a period of one month up to November 9, 1975 and during the pendency of this petition it was further continued for a period of one month upto December 9, 1975. By an order dated December 8, 1975 the Commissioner of Police continued the said order under Section 37(3) for a period of one month upto January 8, 1976. While these orders were in operation, the Government of Maharashtra by its order dated October 14, 1975 in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 69 read with Rule 1A of the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules 1971 for the purpose of securing the maintenance of public order and internal security prohibited the holding of any public meeting inter alia in Greater Bombay, where any matter relating to or arising out of or connected with the existing emergency declared under the proclamation of emergency issued under Article 352(1) of the Constitution on June 25, 1975 is to be or likely to be discussed or referred to or is discussed or referred to, by any speaker or other person taking part hi the public meeting, except after obtaining the prior permission of the Commissioner of Police, Bombay so far as the area of Greater Bombay was concerned.

(2.) THE petitioners, who are the convener and office bearers of the Bombay Committee of Lawyers for Civil Liberties were desirous of holding a meeting of lawyers of Greater Bombay to discuss the civil liberties and the rule of law. This Committee is restricted to lawyers and is formed for preservation and promotion of Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law. According to the petitioners the proposed meeting was to be strictly a private meeting and restricted only to lawyer invitees. A private indoor meeting was fixed to be held at Jinnah Hall, V.P. Road, Bombay -4, on Saturday, October 18, 1975. The said meeting was proposed to be addressed amongst others by Mr. M.C. Chagla, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Mr. J.C. Shah, former Chief Justice of India and the petitioner No. 1, a former Judge of this High Court. The idea underlying the proposed meeting was to discuss in a constructive manner the question of Civil Liberty and the Rule of Law under the Constitution. Most of the cards that were issued by way of individual invitation to a specified number of lawyers had the words endorsed thereon in hand -writing 'PRIVATE MEETING: NON -TRANSFERABLE.' About 500 invitations were distributed to lawyers and further invitations were proposed to be distributed to lawyers. The petitioners were of the view that permission of the Commissioner of Police was not necessary for holding such a meeting. However, as the Committee believed in the Rule of Law, a request was made without prejudice to its contention, to grant permission, if necessary, for holding this meeting. Such request was made bya letter dated October 10, 1975, addressed to the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay. The Commissioner of Police by his letter dated October 13, 1975 stated that the request for holding the proposed meeting on October 18, 1975 could not be granted. It is the order refusing to grant permission by the Commissioner of Police that is being challenged in this petition on the grounds which will be adverted to a little later.

(3.) THIS petition was presented to Bhatt J. on October 17, 1975. The learned Judge admitted the petition but felt that as an important question was involved relating to freedom of speech, meetings and Civil Liberty, appropriate directions be taken from me for having the matter placed before a Bench of two or more Judges and for passing such interim orders as may be necessary. Accordingly the petition came up for interim orders before a Division Bench of which I was a member. As there was no time left for the respondents to make affidavits in reply and as the issues involved in the petition were of vital importance, time as desired by the respondents was given for making affidavits in reply.