The Supreme Court of India has clarified that while the right to protest is constitutionally protected, no individual, group, or organisation can occupy a designated protest site indefinitely. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, was hearing petitions related to recent protests in Delhi, including those against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The Court emphasised that protest sites must be allotted for specific periods to ensure equal access for all groups wishing to exercise their right to protest.According to Live Law, the bench highlighted the need to balance the right to protest with the right to trade and earn a livelihood, particularly for daily-wage workers. Chief Justice Surya Kant stated, “You can't occupy a site for all times. Where farmers, journalists, etc. will go? Everyone has right to protest. Designated site must be given for designated period.”As reported by Bar and Bench, the Court also addressed the economic impact of prolonged protests, noting that traders and daily wage earners in areas surrounding protest sites have suffered significant losses. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing traders, claimed that business losses during the festive season were substantial, affecting millions of workers and ancillary staff."There are conflicting claims. The right to protest is also a constitutionally recognised right, as is the right to trade and carry on business. We are not talking about trade merely in terms of commercial establishments. We are talking about the source of livelihood of a daily-wage worker. Where does that person go for their daily bread?" — Chief Justice Surya KantAs highlighted by Siasat, the Court reiterated that even at designated sites, occupation must be limited to a definite time. The bench directed that permissions for protests should clearly define the terms and conditions, including the duration, to prevent exclusion of other groups seeking to protest.SC Issues Notices to Govt Over Delhi Protests, Crackdown on JournalistsFurther proceedings saw the Court instructing traders’ associations to include protest organisers as parties to their pleas, stating that all stakeholders must be heard before adjudicating on grievances related to business losses and disruptions.The Court also addressed concerns about police action, surveillance, and restrictions during the protests. Coverage revealed that the bench is considering petitions on alleged mass detentions, use of facial recognition technology, and the legal framework for surveillance at protest sites."You cannot occupy a protest site indefinitely. You cannot prevent other people from protesting, saying ‘I can protest and you cannot’," the bench observed.In the context of permissions, analysis showed that the Solicitor General informed the Court that permission for the July protest at Jantar Mantar was granted for only one day, but the site was occupied for 17 days, leading to further complications and a march towards Parliament without prior approval.The Court’s directions also included dividing the connected petitions into nine categories for separate hearings and seeking proposed arguing sequences and time estimates from counsel. As details emerged, the bench clarified that fresh writ petitions would only be entertained if they raised entirely new and distinct issues, as certified by the Advocate-on-Record.'You Cannot Run Anywhere': Rahul's Warning to Modi at Ramlila Anti-CEC ProtestNote: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.