Freedom of speech & expression not absolute: Police on Sec 144

Ahmedabad police on Thursday defended the continuous imposition of Section 144 of the CrPC in the city, which prohibits assembly of more than four persons, saying that a stay on its implementation would lead to "chaos".

The city police, in its affidavit filed before the Gujarat High Court also asserted that although the right to freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental one, it is not absolute.

The police's reply was in response to a petition filed in December last year by professor Navdeep Mathur of IIMA along with four others against the repeated imposition of Section 144 CrPC, which prohibits assembly of more than four persons without police permission.

The police also said that the provision does not take away the right to freedom and expression.

The affidavit, filed by Ahmedabad city police, added that such restrictions under section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is necessary to maintain law and order in the city, which often witnesses violent protests.

"The right to freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right. However, it is not absolute and there are restrictions...The petitioner has not given a single instance which shows that the freedom and liberty or any constitutional right of any citizen is taken away," the reply stated.

After taking the reply on record, Justice Umesh Trivedi posted the matter heading on February 13.

Mathur, who teaches at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, was among the 50-odd persons detained by city police on December 16 for taking part in a peaceful protest outside IIMA campus against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and against the police crackdown on the students in Delhi.

The petitioners had sought quashing of orders passed by the city police commissioner under section 144 of CrPC.

The petition also sought a stay on the implementation of any such order currently in force.

The petitioners had stated that the police order banning assembly of more than four people needs to be quashed "to enable them, the residents of Ahmedabad, exercise their right to freedom of expression, right to peaceful assembly and right to move freely under Article 19(1) of the Constitution".

It was also contended that people in general do not even know that police have issued such notification banning such assembly.

Petitioners argued that orders are passed in a routine manner, as a new notification is issued with almost same text as soon as the tenure of the old notification comes to an end.

In their defence, Ahmedabad police said that any stay on the implementation of the notification would "lead to chaos in law and order situation in the city" and "there is always a requirement of maintaining law and order situation in the city".

"The city had witnessed several protests, agitations and rallies in the past, the latest being those against as well as in favour of the CAA. Despite heavy police deployment, some protesters assaulted on duty police officers and damaged public and private property," it said.

"If the police starts using its powers, then protesters would be behind bars in such situation and a number of FIRs would be lodged. But due to the restrictions imposed under section 144, the police controls the unlawful assembly and only detains them," the affidavit said.

It added that even some of the petitioners, who had organised the rally without permission (outside IIMA in December) were detained and released without any FIR registered against them.

"This provision is not used for restricting public rallies. Permission was given by the police for 10 anti-CAA rallies and even today two protests against CAA are going on at different locations in Rakhiyal area," the reply said.

Replying to the allegation that people are not aware that such restrictions are in place, the police said the notifications are displayed at all the police stations and it is also shared on social media.