The Supreme Court on Monday said people cannot block public road indefinitely and create inconvenience for others but declined to pass an interim direction on pleas for removal of anti-CAA protesters from Shaheen Bagh, the epicentre of demonstrations here for nearly two months.
As it observed that people are entitled to protest but it has to be done in an area identified for agitations and cannot be done on a public road or park, the court also took up the issue of an infant dying on returning home from Shaheen Bagh where his parents had taken him along.
"Can a 4-month-old child be taking part in such (Shaheen Bagh) protests?", the court asked while warning two women lawyers for making "explosive submissions" that children participating in the protests against the Citizenship Amended Act(CAA) are being called names, 'terrorist', 'gaddar' (traitor), 'Pakistani', in school.
The 4-month-old baby had passed away in his sleep on the night of January 30 after returning from Shaheen Bagh.
"Don't make explosive submissions. Please do not make such statements. We do not want people to use this platform to further create problems," said a bench, comprising Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant, when two women advocates--Shahrukh Alam and Nandita Rao--started making submissions.
A bench comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph issued notices to the Centre, Delhi government and Delhi Police asking them to respond to the pleas seeking removal of protesters from Shaheen Bagh and ensuring smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch.
When the counsel appearing for the petitioners urged the court to pass some direction since there was inconvenience to the public, the bench said, "It cannot be done ex-parte. We will hear the other side."
"If you have waited for over 50 days, wait for some more days."
The intervention by the advocates did not go down well with the bench, which said: "We will not hear you on this. Don't make such types of irrelevant arguments."
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed them saying, "Can it be a ground for sitting on dharna with a four-month-old child or can they oppose this on the ground that children are being called names like gaddars in school."
The bench asked, "A four-month old infant had gone to protest? But tell us which four-month-old child goes on its own to protest sites."
"We have the highest respect for motherhood, and highest concern for children. Don't make arguments to raise and create guilt."
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content