“Dilli Chalo”: The High Court requests that Haryana explain the rationale for roadblocks

In light of the farmers’ march, the State of Haryana was questioned by the Punjab and Haryana High Court today on the placement of blockades on the highway. The statement was made when a Division Bench ordered the States of Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh to file status reports and urged the parties to “sit down and solve the problem.”

Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji’s bench declared, “Keeping in view the exigencies of the situation and the general hardship being caused to the public, the court is sanguine that all the parties to the present dispute would make efforts to sit down and solve the problem, and even if a demonstration has to take place, an area should be identified by both the States to allow peaceful agitation by the protestors.”

When many petitions about the matter were brought up for preliminary consideration, the Bench ordered that the Kisan

The non-political Mazdoor Morcha and Samyukta Kisan Morcha need to be designated as “necessary respondents.” It was also mandated that the State of Delhi be included as a “necessary party” via the Home Secretary.

The Bench said that there was no question that the freedom of speech and expression and the right to the unimpeded movement of the general public should be balanced, and that “none of them existing in isolation can be put forth so that the general public is not put to any inconvenience.”

At the hearing, the Bench also mentioned an interim order dated September 23, 2022, that had been issued by the court in a different case. It was noted that the phrase “caution” should be remembered in this order. Force should only be used as a last resort, and then only after all other options have been exhausted. The issue needed to be settled peacefully.

The Bench noted immediately away that the farmers were traveling across roadways and that they were entitled to freedom of movement and assembly. “Why are you obstructing the roads? What causes them? “Are they causing trouble in Haryana?” inquired the Bench.

Union ministers and secretaries were present at two meetings that were conducted to address the problems brought up by the agitators, Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain said the Bench. Following the agitation in 2022, a committee was also established; however, due to a boycott by farmer groups, the committee was unable to carry out its duties.

Deepak Sabharwal, the additional advocate general for Haryana, said that the state had followed the Union of India’s advice and had adopted the appropriate safety measures. In addition, they were concerned that tractor-trailers had been converted into storm barriers. The demonstrators have supplies for a “long sit-out.”

On the other side, Punjab Advocate-General Gurminder Singh said that because the demonstration was nonviolent, no barriers or obstructions had been erected to prevent free passage on the roadways.

Notes made by a double bench

Even if a demonstration is necessary, both States should designate a space so that demonstrators may engage in nonviolent protest.
The public’s right to free movement has to be weighed against the freedom of speech and expression.
Force should only be used as a last resort and only in the most dire circumstances.