Supreme Court of India

In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident v Home Secretary

Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 122 of 201120121 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
On the night of 4-5 June 2011, police enforced a prohibitory order and removed a large gathering, including sleeping persons, from the Ramlila Maidan, Delhi, using lathis and tear gas. The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance.
Issue
Whether the order and its enforcement were lawful and what relief should follow.
Held
The assembly was not shown to be unlawful, and the enforcement at night, without announcement or reasonable time to disperse, violated Article 21 (including the right to sleep). Directions were issued for disciplinary action and criminal cases against erring police and against members of the gathering who damaged property, with investigation to be completed within three months. Ad hoc compensation was awarded (Rs 5 lakh for the death of Rajbala, Rs 50,000 for grievous and Rs 25,000 for simple injuries), with 25% of the amounts for death and grievous hurt to be paid by the organising Trust.
Principle
A prohibitory order cannot be enforced by force against a peaceful, sleeping assembly without warning and reasonable time to disperse
Cite this

Facts

  • On the night of 4-5 June 2011, police enforced a prohibitory order and removed a large gathering, including sleeping persons, from the Ramlila Maidan, Delhi, using lathis and tear gas. The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance.

Issue

  1. Whether the order and its enforcement were lawful and what relief should follow.

Held

  • The assembly was not shown to be unlawful, and the enforcement at night, without announcement or reasonable time to disperse, violated Article 21 (including the right to sleep). Directions were issued for disciplinary action and criminal cases against erring police and against members of the gathering who damaged property, with investigation to be completed within three months. Ad hoc compensation was awarded (Rs 5 lakh for the death of Rajbala, Rs 50,000 for grievous and Rs 25,000 for simple injuries), with 25% of the amounts for death and grievous hurt to be paid by the organising Trust.

Ratio decidendi

The manner of enforcing a prohibitory order must itself be reasonable and proportionate.

Exam use

How to use it in an answer

Cite on limits of police power in dispersing assemblies. The SCC citation was not confirmed on Indian Kanoon and is omitted.

Cite this

Citation

In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident v Home Secretary Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 122 of 2011

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/17021567/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.