Paper Details

Name: Swapna Bijayini
Country: India

Year: 2024
Volume: Volume-11, Issue-1 (January-June)
Page Number: 192-196

ABSTRACT
The right to protest and assemble peacefully forms an essential pillar of constitutional
democracy and democratic participation in India. Guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution, these rights enable citizens to express dissent, influence
governance, and hold authorities accountable. However, the exercise of these freedoms is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order under Articles 19(2) and 19(3). This article critically examines the evolving judicial trends concerning the balance between public order and public voice in India. It analyses landmark decisions of the Supreme Court that have shaped protest jurisprudence, including cases related to peaceful demonstrations, preventive restrictions, proportionality, sedition, internet shutdowns, and constitutional morality. The study highlights how earlier judicial approaches strongly protected democratic dissent and participatory governance, whereas contemporary trends increasingly reflect regulatory control through preventive governance, spatial restrictions, and executive discretion. The article further evaluates whether the doctrine of proportionality and constitutional morality are being effectively applied to safeguard civil liberties. It argues that excessive reliance on public order concerns risks shrinking civic space and weakening democratic engagement. The paper concludes that a constitutional democracy must preserve spaces for disagreement and dissent, and that public order should function not as an instrument of suppression but as a framework that enables and protects democratic expression
and participation.

Keywords: Public Order; Public Voice; Right to Protest; Freedom of Assembly; Freedom of
Speech; Judicial Trends; Constitutional Democracy; Proportionality; Dissent; Constitutional Morality.