Aishe Ghosh Challenges Delhi Police Surveillance At Jantar Mantar In High Court
A petition was filed in the Delhi High Court challenging the continuous surveillance of peaceful protesters by the Delhi Police at Jantar Mantar. The plea alleges that round-the-clock monitoring, photography, and videography have been conducted at the site since a sit-in protest and hunger strike began on June 20.
The petition was moved by former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union (JNUSU) president Aishe Ghosh through advocates Subhash Chandran KR and Anirudh KP. It comes amid an ongoing protest at the site led by student activist Abhijeet Dipke under the banner of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).
Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petition names the Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, as respondents.
According to the plea, the authorities have installed a permanent surveillance tower fitted with cameras at the Jantar Mantar protest site. The petition alleges that police personnel have continuously photographed and videographed protesters, creating an atmosphere of intimidation that discourages citizens from participating in lawful, peaceful democratic protests.
The petitioner claims that the surveillance covers every individual present at the site regardless of any suspicion of unlawful activity. It reportedly records routine personal activities, including eating, resting, and seeking medical assistance.
The plea also alleges that police personnel threatened student protesters by saying their photographs and videos would be shared with their parents, guardians, and educational institutions. It further claims that women protesters were photographed and videographed in drenched clothes during heavy rainfall because there was no adequate shelter at the site.
The petition argues that the surveillance violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. It contends that the monitoring fails to satisfy the constitutional requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality laid down by the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy judgment.
Among its prayers, the petition seeks a declaration that continuous mass surveillance at designated protest sites is constitutionally impermissible. It calls for an immediate suspension of mass photography and videography at Jantar Mantar until a real threat to public order is demonstrated. It also seeks the preservation of surveillance records, the formulation of comprehensive guidelines governing surveillance at peaceful assemblies, and the provision of basic civic amenities like drinking water and sanitation at the protest site.
