"Is This a Fish Market?": CJI Rebukes Lawyer in Delhi Protest Case

Delhi Protest Supreme Court Hearing: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court regarding the demonstrations by the 'INDIA' alliance and the 'Cockroach Janata Party' in Delhi and the troubles arising from them. During the hearing on Tuesday, November 3, a heated argument was witnessed in the court, and Chief Justice Surya Kant reprimanded the lawyer representing the petitioner's side.

Why was the Chief Justice angry
During the hearing, the lawyer representing the petitioner’s side was repeatedly interrupting. The lawyer for the petitioner argued that protesting is a fundamental right. Whatever venue is designated for the protest, business activities will naturally take place there as well. Therefore, protest, business activities will naturally take place there as well. Therefore, protests cannot be stopped merely by citing business interests. It was then, during the hearing, that the Chief Justice reprimanded one the petitioner's lawyers who was interrupting repeatedly. He said, "Have you taken the court for a fish market? This kind of conduct will not be tolerated."

The Government's Stand
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the government, stated that separate responses addressing all aspects related to this matter have been prepared and are being filed in court. He said that, despite having obtained permission for only a single day in July, the individuals remained on a sit-in protest for 17 days and subsequently issued a call for a 'march to Parliament'.

Arguments by Traders' Organizations
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of the traders, said that there are wholesale markets around Ramlila Maidan and trade is suffering heavy losses due to these protests. He urged the court to find a solution to this problem.

Arguments by Prashant Bhushan
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, demanded that a notice should be issued on the petition filed against the police capturing photographs and videos of individuals during protests, as it violates people's privacy.