New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain requests looking for clarification on the 2020 verdict where he had that public spaces could not be occupied without limits and demonstrations that express differences of opinion must be in designated places.
While deciding the request against the occupation of the public streets in the anti-CAA protest in Shaheen Bagh, a bench headed by the SK Kaul justice, on October 7, 2020, said that democracy and differences of opinion “, but right”, but their rights to protest and state The difference of opinion is there with the obligation to certain tasks.
“The problem is complete, why is it registered.
What is sought for clarification.
I do not understand …
the whole problem is complete …
there is no clarification of the assessment.
Judgment speaks for himself.
Dismissed,” said the Judican Skal Skal, towards benches also consisting from MM Sundresh.
The bench rejected the application, looking for some clarification in connection with the right to protest in public places, saying that he could not explain the judgment of talking to entertaining a request in terms of Indian citizenship discarded for the minority of Pakistani persecution, Afghanistan and Bangladeshi.
It is said that mode and how to dissent on colonial rules cannot be equated with differences of opinion in their own ruled democracy.
“However, while appreciating the right to peaceful protests to the law …
we must make it clear that the public and public spaces cannot be occupied in such a way and that is also ndefinely,” he said.
“So, we have no doubt concluding that such types of public work, both in a questionable location or elsewhere for unacceptable protests and administrations must take action to keep the encroachment area or barrier,” said.
SC rejected the request to seek clarification of 2020 verdict on Shaheen Bagh protest
