Right to Protest (Freedom of Assembly and Speech)
Indian Polity & Governance
- PYQs8
- Articles1
Background
This right is a cornerstone of Indian democracy, frequently debated in the context of public order, state action, and judicial interpretation. UPSC examines its scope, limitations, and contemporary relevance.
The right to protest peacefully is implicitly guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and Article 19(1)(b) (right to assemble peacefully and without arms) of the Indian Constitution. These fundamental rights are crucial for a vibrant democracy, allowing citizens to express dissent and hold the government accountable.
Facts & tables
- Constitutional Basis
- Derived from Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India.
- Reasonable Restrictions
- Not an absolute right; subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) and 19(3).
- Grounds for Restriction
- Restrictions can be imposed in the interest of public order, sovereignty and integrity of India, morality, etc.
- Judicial Interpretation
- Supreme Court has affirmed the right to peaceful protest but also emphasized balancing it with public order and convenience.
| Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Conceptual area | Indian Polity & Governance |
| Body | Role |
|---|---|
| Delhi Police | Manages public order during protests |
| Judiciary | Interprets and enforces the right to protest |
Prelims angle
Prelims angle: Multi-statement analysis
Prelims angle: Conceptual understanding
- Derived from Art 19(1)(a) & (b).
- Subject to reasonable restrictions (Art 19(2) & (3)).
- Not absolute; balance with public order.
- Essential for democratic expression.
- Judiciary interprets scope and limits.
| Year | Framing tags |
|---|---|
| 2026 | Conceptual understanding, Terminology-based question |
| 2025 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2024 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
| 2022 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Conceptual understanding, Factual recall |
| 2019 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
| 2018 | Conceptual understanding, Factual recall |
Timeline
-
Indian Polity & Governance
Conceptual area
-
Prelims 2018
Conceptual understanding, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2019
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Conceptual understanding, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2022
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2024
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2025
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2026
Conceptual understanding, Terminology-based question
-
Delhi HC dismisses PIL over Sonam Wangchuk’s removal from Jantar Mantar
The right to protest, rooted in fundamental rights to speech and assembly, allows citizens to express dissent peacefully, but is subject to reasonable state-imposed restrictions for public order and national security.
See also
Past papers
2018–2026 · 8 questions
In the news
Delhi HC dismisses PIL over Sonam Wangchuk’s removal from Jantar Mantar
The right to protest, rooted in fundamental rights to speech and assembly, allows citizens to express dissent peacefully, but is subject to reasonable state-imposed restrictions for public order and national security.
Try these PYQs
Consider the following statements:
1. ‘Right to the City’ is an agreed human right and the UN-Habitat monitors the commitments made by each country in this regard.
2. ‘Right to the City’ gives every occupant of the city the right to reclaim public spaces and public participation in the city.
3. ‘Right to the City’ means that the State cannot deny any public service or facility to the unauthorized colonies in the city.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct:
Statement 1 is incorrect. The “Right to the City” is not a formally agreed universal human right in international law. It is a normative and political concept. UN-Habitat uses the idea in the New Urban Agenda, but: it does not legally monitor binding national commitments. Statement 2 is correct. The Right to the City is the right of all inhabitants (present and future, permanent and temporary) to inhabit, use, occupy, produce, transform, govern, and enjoy cities, towns, and human settlements that are just, inclusive, safe, sustainable and democratic, defined as common goods for enjoying life with dignity and peace. The right to the city further implies responsibilities on governments and people to claim, defend, and promote this right. Statement 3 is correct. “Right to the City” is interpreted as an inclusive urban citizenship right. The concept says that all city dwellers, including: migrants, slum dwellers, residents of unauthorized colonies, have a claim to urban services and dignity. It views residents not as “encroachers” but as rights-bearing urban citizens who contribute to the city economy. Hence: denial of water, sanitation, waste management, etc. merely because a settlement is “unauthorized” is seen as violating the spirit of Right to the City. Indian courts have also held that basic services cannot be denied even to illegal settlements, as they are part of Article 21 – Right to Life. Note: UPSC usually takes welfare centric approach in questions.
X' was addressing a seminar on the meaning of the term 'law' as provided under Article 13, Part III of the Constitution of India. 'X' explained that the meaning of the term 'law' in the Constitution of India was very comprehensive. It included ordinances, orders and even rules and regulations. 'Y' pointed out that the term 'law' in Article 13 also included custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law, to which 'X' was not convinced.
Based on the above, select the correct conclusion from the options given below :
Article 13 of the Indian Constitution provides for the protection of Fundamental Rights and declares that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of Part III of the Constitution shall be void to the extent of the inconsistency. To prevent the State from bypassing Fundamental Rights through executive or traditional means, Article 13(3)(a) provides a highly expansive definition of the term "law". It explicitly states that "law" includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law. Therefore, the view of 'Y' that the term 'law' includes custom or usage is absolutely correct. Because "custom or usage" is expressly listed in the constitutional text, uncodified traditional practices that hold the force of law are subject to the exact same constitutional scrutiny as formal legislative statutes. 'X' is incorrect in doubting or rejecting the inclusion of custom or usage within the definition of law under Article 13. Thus, regarding the point of contention, only the view of 'Y' is correct. Therefore, the correct option is D.
Under which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India, has the Supreme Court of India placed the Right to Privacy?
* The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs Union of India (2017), declared that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India. * The court held that this right is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. * Article 21: States that 'No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.' The court interpreted 'personal liberty' broadly to include various aspects of privacy. _While the other options are fundamental rights, they are not directly where the Right to Privacy is placed:_ * Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. * Article 16: Guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. * Article 19: Guarantees certain freedoms like speech and expression, assembly, etc.
‘Right to privacy’ is protected under which Article of the Constitution of India?
The right to privacy in India is not explicitly mentioned in a single article of the Constitution. However, it is considered an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21. This recognition came about through a landmark Supreme Court judgment in 2017, K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs Union of India. The court ruled that the right to privacy is an inseparable part of the right to life and personal liberty, and is protected under Article 21.
Which Article of the Constitution of India safeguards one’s right to marry the person of one’s choice?
Article 21: This article states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has expanded the scope of personal liberty to include various fundamental rights, including the right to marry a person of one's choice. Shamima Begum vs. State of Assam (2018): The court ruled that a woman has the right to marry a person of her choice, reinforcing that personal decisions related to marriage fall under individual autonomy and personal liberty as guaranteed by Article 21. Hadiya's case (Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M): The Supreme Court upheld the right to marry as a fundamental right under Article 21. It ruled that an adult woman is free to make decisions regarding her marriage, rejecting attempts to interfere in personal choices. The court emphasized that state or societal disapproval cannot restrict an individual’s right to marry.
Show 3 more PYQs
Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement?
Right to Privacy and Article 21: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. In the landmark 2017 judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India unanimously held that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21. This ruling reinforced privacy as a fundamental right, ensuring protection against unwarranted state and private intrusions. Part III of the Constitution covers Fundamental Rights, which include: - Article 19: Right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, and other essential liberties. - Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, which now includes privacy after the Puttaswamy judgment. Article 14: Ensures equality before the law, but does not explicitly deal with privacy. Article 17: Abolishes untouchability. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are non-enforceable guidelines, not fundamental rights. Article 24: Prohibits child labor but has no relation to privacy. Thus, the right to privacy is most closely linked to Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III of the Indian Constitution. Hence the correct answer is option (c).
With reference to the writs, issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements:
1. Mandamus will not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public duty.
2. Mandamus will not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company.
3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: Mandamus is a command issued by the court to a public official asking him to perform his official duties that he has failed or refused to perform. It can also be issued against any public body, a corporation, an inferior court, a tribunal, or a government for the same purpose. It is usually not usable against a private entity unless it is entrusted with a public duty. Statement 2 is correct: As explained above, Mandamus can be used against a government corporation and/or company when it is discharging a "public duty", so the statement is incomplete. Public Duty is Key: Mandamus aims to compel performance of a public duty, not just private functions. Statement 3 is correct: Quo Warranto is issued by the court to inquire into the legality of the claim of a person to a public office. Hence, it prevents illegal usurpation of public office by a person. Unlike the other writs, this can be sought by any interested person and not necessarily by the aggrieved person. Note (on Statement 2): In UPSC Prelims, statements must be judged as written, without adding extra conditions. A company does not become subject to the writ of Mandamus only because it is a Government company. Government ownership by itself is not enough. Since Statement 2 is framed in this limited and absolute sense, and no additional condition like “public duty” is mentioned, the statement is treated as correct.
With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements:
I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act.
II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right.
III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
An Ordinance is a temporary law issued by the President (Article 123) or Governor (Article 213) when the legislature is not in session. It holds the same force as a regular law, but must adhere to constitutional limits. ✅ Statement I: Correct
* An Ordinance can amend any Central Act, just like a Parliamentary law, subject to constitutional provisions. ❌ Statement II: Incorrect
* Ordinances cannot abridge Fundamental Rights as per Article 13(2) of the Constitution. Any such provision is void. ✅ Statement III: Correct
* Ordinances can be given retrospective effect, i.e., they can be enforced from a past date.