Read Time: 08 minutes

The Supreme Court has today allowed 3 weeks time to the Farmer Unions to file a reply in the plea seeking remedy over the inconvenience caused to the general public due to the blockade of roads by the farmers amid their protest against three farm laws.

A divisional bench SK Kaul and Justice MM Sundresh said, "the issue is whether they can block roads. We aren't against the right to protest."

Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave appearing for the farmer union submitted that we are not blocking roads. Police have put blockades. "better arrangements may be made by Delhi Police, allow us to sit in Ramleela Maidan then," Dave added.

Dave further requested the bench to transfer the matter before another bench.

The Court has noted that we'll decide the Contours of the matter and decide whether it can be transferred to another bench, Court has also asked the farmer unions to file a reply within 3 weeks and the rejoinder will be filed thereafter.

A division bench comprising Justice Justice SK Kaul and Justice MM Sundaresh was hearing a plea filed by Monicca Agarwaal alleging that traveling to Delhi from Noida for her marketing job had become a nightmare as it took 2 hours instead of 20 minutes due to the protestors swarming the roads.

Background:

Earlier, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the application had been filed with regard to the impleadment of farmers.

On the last date, the Court had asked Mehta to file an application informing about what has been done yet in this regard and what purpose will the impleadment of farmers serve in the matter.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had then submitted that a meeting was convened along with a three-member committee, however, the farmers refused to join. "They may be asked to join as a party," Mehta added.

It is pertinent to note that Court had said that though every citizen had the right to protest, it was not to be done at the expense of blocking ingress and digress of traffic. The court said that the solution did in fact lay in the hands of the Union of India.

On April 19, 2021 bench comprising Justice SK Kaul & Justice Hemant Gupta while adjourning the plea had remarked, "Don't obstruct the life of other people there. You may want to construct a village, and you can do that. But not at the cost of other's inconvenience.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had informed that an endeavor was being done from their side concerning the directions issued by this Court. 

The petitioner, appearing in person, had averred that despite the various directions passed by this Court to keep the to and fro passage clear (the roads), the same still did not happen.

On April 9, 2021, the Bench comprising Justice SK Kaul & Justice Hemant Gupta after perusing the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2, impleaded the State of Haryana and the State of Uttar Pradesh as respondent Nos.3 and 4.

"We have clarified to the Solicitor General that we are not concerned with the larger issue but only limited to the aspect of free flow of traffic on the streets, i.e., the public streets should not be blocked. This is an aspect which has been repeatedly emphasized in different orders of this Court.", the order dated April 9, 2021 read.

On March 26, 2021, the Bench comprising Justice SK Kaul & Justice R Subhash Reddy took note of the administrative failure as the judicial view was already propounded by the Court & issued notice to the Respondents to ensure that the road area is kept clear so that the passage from one place to other is not affected.

Case Title: Monicca Agarwaal V. Union Of India & Anr.