III SEMESTER B.com, LL.B (hons.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

TOPIC- FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE

Submitted by- Rishabh Rela

14BBL047

Section c

1|Page
 INTRODUCTION

FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE

Freedom to assemble is basically a fundamental right granted to the citizens of India

by the supreme rule of the country that is the constitution of India. Article 19 (1) (b) of
part III that is fundamental rights of the Indian constitution provides for the right to
assemble peacefully and without arms to the citizens of the country India.

The article states that the assembly has to be non violent and should not breach the
peace of public. Clause 3 of article 19 imposes certain restrictions on the right to
assemble if it affects the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India or public order.

The basic agenda of this paper is to cover all the aspects of the right available to the
citizens and to test the unlawfulness of the assembly or the miss use of the right. Paper
also deals with various case laws to explain the implementation of the law in Indian
context. Paper also explains how the cultural rights of a citizen are linked to the
freedom to assemble and how it is exercised with relation to each other. The paper
also covers a foreign case law named THE LATTIMER MASSACRE OF 1897, which
is related to the freedom to assemble and explains the formation of the concept of this
right to the citizens. Then in the later part the paper covers various case laws in the
Indian context for the better understanding of the prevailing law in India and its
implementation.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For accomplishing the research work, I have researched various authentic sources
dealing with the subject matter of fundamental right that is freedom to assemble, and
covering all the aspects of it. I have gone thoroughly through the various published
papers and books of various publications relating to the aspects of the topic. Main
research work is done through the secondary sources.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS REFERED

1. V.N. Shukla, Constitution of India, eastern book company, 2013 twelfth

edition.

2|Page
 2. Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution cornerstone of a nation, oxford India
paperbacks, 2007 eleventh edition.
3. Braham Singh, History of constitutional developments, ALFA publications,
2008 first edition.

ARTICLES REFERED

1. A. G. Noorani, Right to Assemble Peaceably, Economic and Political Weekly,

Vol. 22, No. 28 (Jul. 11, 1987), p. 1111, last visited on 12th July, 2015 at 10:22
P.M, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4377208.
2. KENNETH C. WOLENSKY, FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE & THE
LATTIMER MASSACRE OF 1897, Pennsylvania Legacies, Vol. 8, No. 1
(MAY 2008), pp. 24-27, 29-31, last visited on 12th July, 2015 at 10:35 P.M,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27765129.
3. Brian I. Daniels, Culture, Cultural Rights, and the Right to Assemble,
Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 83, No. 4 (Fall 2010), pp. 883-895, last visited
on 12th July, 2015 at 10:47 P.M, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40890843.
4. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom+of+assembly
5. http://www.shareyouressays.com/115321/freedom-to-assemble-peaceably-and-
without-arms-as-provided-under-article-19-1-n-of-the-constitution-of-india
6. www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/P
ages/Righttofreedomofassemblyandassociation.aspx.
7. www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/human-
rights-act/article-11-right-protest-and-freedom-association

LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Constitution of India.
Author- V.N. Shukla.
This book helped me to understand the right from the ground level and helped
me in understanding the article thoroughly.
2. The Indian Constitution cornerstone of a nation.
Author- Granville Austin.
This book helped me to understand the logics behind this fundamental right
and the restrictions attached to it.
3. History of constitutional developments.

3|Page
 Author- Braham Singh
This book basically explains the debates at the time of framing of the
constitution. It explains how and why the fundamental rights came into
existence.
4. Culture, Cultural Rights, and the Right to Assemble.
Author- Brian I. Daniels
This paper helps in understanding how the freedom to assemble goes hand in
hand with cultural rights.
5. FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE & THE LATTIMER MASSACRE OF 1897.
Author- KENNETH C. WOLENSKY
This article explains a case law and how the fright came into existence in
foreign countries.
6. Right to Assemble Peaceably.
Author- A. G. Noorani.
This article deals with Indian cases and incidents that are relating to the
freedom to assemble.

4|Page
 FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLE

The citizens of India are provided the basic rights and the most important rights which
are the charter of all the rights provided in the Constitution of India. These rights are
provided in part III of the Indian constitution which are inalienable and are considered
as civil liberty rights which provides all Indians to live their lives as citizens of India
with peace and harmony. These rights are very essential for the fact that they protect
the rights and the liberties of the people against the exploitation from the Government.
These rights are more of a limitation upon the State to encroach or exploit the citizens
of the countries as they preserve the public and private rights of the citizens against
the instruments of the government or judiciary.

In the Constitution of India these rights are contained in part III and cover Articles
from 12 to Article 35. Right to Assemble is also a fundamental right among these
rights under Article 19 (1) (b).

The Article 19 (1) (b) states that the citizens have the right to hold public meetings
and form associations without arms and these meetings and associations require it to
be peaceful for it being legal and without interference by the government. Freedom of
peaceful assembly is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution which
came to enactment in 1951 and was introduced by Jawahar lal Nehru.1

Freedom of assembly, at times utilized reciprocally with the freedom of association,

is the individual right or capacity to meet up and all things considered express,
advance, seek after, and shield their ideas. The right to freedom of association is
perceived as a human right, political right and common freedom.

Freedom of assembly and freedom of association may be utilized to recognize the

opportunity to amass in broad daylight places and the flexibility of joining an
affiliation. Opportunity of get together is frequently utilized as a part of the right's
setting to dissent, while flexibility of affiliation is utilized as a part of the connection
of work rights and the Constitution of the United States, is translated to mean both the
flexibility to gather and the opportunity to join an affiliation.

1
Avlaible at- http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom+of+assembly (last visited on
18/09/2015).

5|Page
Article 19 (1) (b) provides for all the citizens to assemble peacefully but without any
arms. This is merely an individual right, like the other rights and not a restrictive right.
This also includes right to hold meetings and to take out public processions at public
places. But this right too has some restrictions to it for it being legal. The assembly
must not be violent and should not cause breach of any public order or policy. 2

THE UNLAWFULNESS OF AN ASSEMBLY CAN BE TESTED AS-

1. If it does not resist the execution of any legal provision or any law or legal
process.3
2. If its motive is not to commit any mischief or criminal trespass.4
3. If it is not to obtain possession of any property by force.5
4. If it compels a person to do if he is not legally bound to do or omit what he is
legally entitled to do.6
5. If it does not out power the government by means of criminal force or showing
of criminal force.7

It is also that a assembly can be made illegal and asked to dispersed if, at the time of
gathering it was not unlawful but subsequently became unlawful by either becoming
violent or disturbing the peace of public order and peace. Section 129 of Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 the assembly can be ordered or held to disperse if it is of any
threat to cause disturbance to public policy. Also it is backed by section 151 of the
IPC which makes it a criminal offence if the disperse is not done after the lawful
command for disperse is given.

The Indian constitution does not allow you to carry arms to any assembly, for it being
legal, unlike the American Constitution which grants them the permission to carry and
bear arms to any of the assemblies and which does not make it unlawful. Also the
Prevention of Seditions Meeting Act, 1911 prohibits any public meeting for not to
promote seditions or to create disturbance of any type to public tranquillity.

2
Available at- http://www.shareyouressays.com/115321/freedom-to-assemble-peaceably-and-
without-arms-as-provided-under-article-19-1-n-of-the-constitution-of-india (last visited on
18/09/2015)
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
Id.
6
Id.
7
Id.

6|Page
Area 107 of Criminal Procedure Code engaged a Magistrate to get security for
keeping the peace from any individual why should likely perpetrate a break of peace.
Section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code engages the judge to limit a gathering,
meeting or parade if there is a danger of block, inconvenience or harm to any
individual legally utilized or peril to human life, wellbeing or security or an open's
aggravation quietness or uproar or any affray.

Considering the above statements it can be concluded that the CrPC and IPC impose
certain amount of restriction on the freedom to assembly which is considered under
the section 19 (3) of the constitution.

Section 19 (3) reads as follows-

Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing
law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the
interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order, reasonable
restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause.8

These restrictions which are subjected to lawful assembly are-

1. The assembly must be peaceful.

2. The assembly must be unarmed.
3. The assembly is subject to restrictions in the interest of public order.

It was held in Balm Lai v. State of Maharashtra 9that section 144 of Criminal
Procedure Code prohibits conducting public meetings but it is not volatile of the
freedom of assembly instead this section can be used to ban meetings or any assembly
withholding more than five persons can be declared unlawful and can be ordered to
disperse.

INDIAN LAWS VS. INTERNATIONAL LAWS-

After a brief understanding of the right in India now let us see how it works in the
International law. There these rights hold the position to protect the group and the
individual rights so as to meet and peacefully protest. They protect the individuals

8
Gopal Shankaranarayan, The Constitution of India, 7th Ed. 2014, p. 28.
9
Balm Lai v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1961 S.C. 884.

7|Page
against the mishaps of forming associations and to pursue the common objective of
the meeting.

In international law this right is backed by various international human rights treaties.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), article 21 & 22
provides for freedom of right to assemble. It is also provided for in the article 8 (1) (a)
of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Article 5 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(CERD), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), article 15 and article 21 of
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) also deals with the
same right.10

One needs to consider his or her right to assemble peacefully when he or she is to
work on any policy or programme that-

1. Regulates or restricts any individuals or a group of person to peacefully

protest.
2. Regulates membership of various associations or groups, particularly trade
unions.
3. Enables a person to disclose his association with any group or association.
4. Treats and handle individuals differently regarding their association with other
groups or association.11

And also it provides and explains when and how can this assembly be unlawful and
can be called to disperse. Certain situations can lead the assembly to be unlawful and
not protected under the right to peacefully assemble-

1. If in any case it impinges to the freedom of assembly to the greater extinct than
is necessary.
2. If any such assembly is hampering the public good or the public policy.
3. It is efficient enough to cause dissert among the masses and hamper the public
order.12

10
Available at-
www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/Pages/Righttofreed
omofassemblyandassociation.aspx (last visited on 19/09/2015).
11
Available at-
www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/Pages/Righttofreed
omofassemblyandassociation.aspx (last visited on 19/09/2015).

8|Page
SCOPE OF FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY-

The right to assembly basically protects the rights of individuals or the groups that
posses in common a purpose or idea or information to put forward their views out
open in public. This right is for all the associations and gatherings that have the
common intention of peaceful purposes.

The right to assemble provides protection to all the people or group that have gathered
together for the common purpose which is lawful and peaceful. The people or group/
association of these people cannot call for the right if their intention in not lawful or
even if it later changes to unlawful after the commission of association. Examples of
such associations that can claim for right can be-

1. Political parties which regularly conduct public meetings or mass gatherings

for addressing the public at large. They can claim the right for protecting them
against any action as their act is justified and peaceful, not hampering the
public policy at large.
2. Non-governmental organisations which are regularly holding public meetings
and rallies. But their all the gatherings are not legal and they are only entitled
to use the right till the extent they are not engaged in the practice of sedition or
incite violence among the public.

There is as such no specific international law which states about the freedom of
association or the right to assembly. Article 22 (2) of International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the
members of armed forces in their exercise of the right to freedom of association.13

Article 21 states the restrictions to the right of association which are reasonable and
are in interest of national security, public order, or the protection of public health or
morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. In any cases the

12
Available at-
www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/Pages/Righttofreed
omofassemblyandassociation.aspx (last visited on 20/09/2015).
13
Available at-
www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/Pages/Righttofreed
omofassemblyandassociation.aspx (last visited on 20/09/2015).

9|Page
restriction is only envied by the legislation and that restriction must be to achieve the
desired purpose and ought to be proportionate to the requirement of the limitation.14

RIGHT TO ASSEMBLY AND RIGHT TO SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is closely related to right of freedom of

expression. It is considered as a means or way of public expression towards any issue
of the democratic nation. The masses are given rights to assembly and do public
demonstrations and express themselves but within certain reasonable restrictions so as
to maintain the public harmony and not to risk the national security.

These restrictions that can be envied on the right cannot be on the vital basis. They
have to be of serious concern so as to stop individuals from claiming the fundamental
right. This right merely cannot be denied if there is a difference of opinion of the
protestors or merely because it is likely to be of non convenience or might create
nuisance or there is a slight possibility that there may be heated exchange of the two
sides. Instead there is the responsibility on the state to take efficient steps so as to
ensure that individuals have their right and no one encroaches on it without having
reasonable grounds. To better understand the relativity of the freedom to assemble and
right to speech and expression we would understand it through a case study. 15

In the early 2003 there was a case which was decided by the House of Lords in which
there were around 120 protestors who were declined to exercise their right to assemble
and right to speech and expression simultaneously.

Facts of the case are as follow-

1. In mid 2003 around 120 protestors went by three coaches from London with a
specific end goal to demonstrate against the Iraq war at a Royal Air Base in
Gloucestershire. Five kilometers from the Air Base, police, who had the
knowledge about the gathering was heading out to the dissent, halted the
coaches. Police looked the coaches and grabbed various things including head

14
Available at-
www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/PublicSectorGuidanceSheets/Pages/Righttofreed
omofassemblyandassociation.aspx (last visited on 20/09/2015).
15
Available at- www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/human-rights-
act/article-11-right-protest-and-freedom-association (last visited on 20/09/2015).

10 | P a g e
 protectors, overalls, scarves, scissors and a wellbeing fire fitting in belonging
to very little number of protestors.
2. The police then took the choice that while there was no legitimate premise to
arrest anybody for breach of the peace, they would turn the coaches back and
keep the gathering from going to the challenge. Subsequently, everybody in
the coach were induced back on to the coaches (under the impression they
would be headed to the protest), yet then compelled to come back to London
for the 2 hour venture. The coaches had a police escort the whole way and
were kept from ceasing anyplace, notwithstanding for individuals to assuage
themselves.
3. One of the protestors filled a judicial review against the police under Articles
10 and 11 of the HRA.

JUDGEMENT

The House of Lords exclaimed the actions of the police to be illegitimate and that they
breached the fundamental right of the protestors to freely express themselves. House
of Lords sentenced that since there was no imminent threat to breach of the peace
therefore the actions of the police do not hold any competence with the law and hence,
were illegitimate. The police was also held liable to restrict the protestors use their
right to free assembly without holding any substantial and reasonable ground.16

CASE LAWS

Now for better understanding of the section 19 (1) (b), and to understand the ground
reality of the working of this section we can look for the important relevant case laws,
which would be dealing with the law and also the other relevant articles of the Indian
Constitution.

1. Medha Patkar v. State Of M.P. And Anr.17

In this case the counsel presented that in activity of the essential right ensured
under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India, the petetioner and different
individuals from the venture influenced groups of the Sardar Sarovar Project

16
Available at- www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/human-rights-
act/article-11-right-protest-and-freedom-association (last visited on 20/09/2015).

17
Medha Patkar v. State Of M.P. And Anr, 2008 CriLJ 47, 2007 (4) MPHT 219

11 | P a g e
 had assembled together and were making requests for area on the basis of R &
R policy of the Government, NWDT recompense and the judgment of the
Surpeme Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India and Ors. , yet
they were captured by utilization of ruthless power by the police on 25.7.2007
and were kept in prison for a few days disregarding the privilege ensured by
Article 21 of the Constitution. He further presented that a great many pumps
and different properties of the venture influenced families were submerged by
the sudden arrival of the water from the dam. He presented that after the
candidate's capture and different Satyagrahis on 25.7.2007, every one of their
possessions at the Satyagarh site were taken away by the police. He contended
that the sacred right to property of the applicant and different fomenters
ensured under Article 300A of the Constitution of India was, in this way,
influenced. He presented that for infringement of key rights ensured under the
Constitution of India and for loss of properties of the solicitor and different
instigators, this Court ought to recompense overwhelming pay against the
respondents. He presented that the High Court ought to additionally guide the
respondents to actualize the NWDT recompense as per the judgment of
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India and Ors. Whats more, concede to
the oustees of the Sardar Sarovar Project of their entitment including area for
area submerged by the Project.
JUDGEMENT
It was held that Article 19 (1) (a) and 19 (1) (b) provides citizens of India with
the freedom of right to speech and expression and right to freedom to assemble
peacefully without arms. It was stated that when a group of people who
gathered at place merely to shout slogans and to keep forward their demand
and their sufferings does not amount to unreasonableness. It cannot be proved
a ground to evict the right of the citizens. By arresting these people not only
their right to assemble was strapped off but also their right to freely express
themselves as a group was taken away from them.18
2. C.N. Annadurai and Ors. V. Unknown.19

18
Available at-
http://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/1103400/?formInput=%20article%2019%281%29%20%28b%29
(last visited on 20/09/2015).
19
C.N. Annadurai and Ors. V. Unknown, AIR 1959 Mad 63, 1959 CriLJ 204, (1958) IIMLJ 363.

12 | P a g e
 In this case eleven people were accused under section 41 of the city police act,
which is a punishable offence. The prosecutions instance was that the charged
had submitted the offense by having continued towards the Triplicane
shoreline on 3-1-1958 to lead an open meeting in resistance of the
Commissioner's request of Police, Madras, dated 31-12-1957, banning all
gatherings in the city aside from certain predefined, classifications of
gatherings which do not require a permission or for which the Commissioner
has already given licenses.
The accused had planned a public gathering on behalf of Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam and had requested for the licence to hold this meeting to the
Commissioner under clause (1) of the city police act. At the same time
Commissioner had got the knowledge about the rally and was under the
impression that it could lead to mass agitation and disturbance in public peace
and order, and so as to protect it he called out a ban on any rallies in the city of
Madras without permission or licence. On receiving the application of the
accused he asked his subordinate to check into the purpose for calling the
meeting and found out that the accused wanted to profess a flag demonstration
and a rally against the prime minister Nehru, and it was not at all devisable to
give permission as the Prime Minister was himself visiting the city of Madras
on the same day. On this account the Commissioner refused to grant
permission for the demonstration. The accused and the others refused to the
order of the Commissioner and in spite of his refusal they went on for
demonstration claiming the act to be under section 19 (1) (a) and 19 (1) (b).
JUDGEMENT
The court did not take the plea of the accused as correct. The court said that the
section 41 of the City Police Act was not encroaching or crossing the
fundamental right to speech and expression or right to assemble peacefully,
instead it was merely a reasonable restriction to maintain the public order and
peace. And hence court held the organisers of the rally guilty for going against
the law or order of the commissioner.20
CONCLUSION

20
Available at- http://indiankanoon.org/doc/146561/ (last visited on 20/09/2015).

13 | P a g e
 Through these case laws and various analysis it is clearly visible and easily
understood the basic law of Article 19 (1) (b) provided for in the Constitution
of India. However reasonable restrictions can made on this law under the
Article 19 (3) where it provides that State can impose any restriction if any
such meeting under 19 (1) (b) may cause and harm to public order, sovereignty
and integrity of India.
To an extent there is a lot similarity between the sections 19 (1) (a) and 19 (1)
(b). Although these are rights provide you to freely express your feeling and to
assemble peacefully in public gatherings but it is also important to notice that
these does not provide right to strike.
Restrictions on freedom of assembly are-
1. It should be peaceful and non-violent.
2. It should be without arms.
3. It should not disturb the public order.

Here assembly also includes meeting that take place in government places,
which could be properly understood with the help of a case law-

Railway Board v. Niranjan Singh21, where the question came up that whether
any person is legally permitted to hold meetings in government premises or
not? In this case the court declared that although the citizens have the right to
express themselves or the hold meetings but that simply does not mean that
they can carry out their meeting wherever they wish to. The exercise of that
freedom with immediately comes to an end as soon as it intervenes with some
others property.

In case Babulal Parate v. State of Maharashtra22 the court stated that The right of
citizens to take out processions or to hold public meetings flows from right in Art. 19
(1) (b) to assemble peacefully and without arms and the right to move anywhere in the
territory of India

21
Railway Board v. Niranjan Singh, AIR 1969 SC 966.
22
Babulal Parate v. State of Maharashtra, 1961 AIR 884, 1961 SCR (3) 423.

14 | P a g e