The right to protest is a fundamental right but not an absolute one. In the light of recent student agitations, discuss the principles that should govern the use of force by the police.

Article 19(1)(b) guarantees citizens the right "to assemble peaceably and without arms". Article 19(3) allows reasonable restrictions on it in the interest of public order. The July 2026 NEET-linked student protests at Jantar Mantar saw alleged pellet-gun use and harassment of women protesters. A Supreme Court-appointed five-member panel under Justice R. Subhash Reddy is now probing them [1]. The case shows that the State's power to restrict protest must itself be bound by clear principles.

Why the right is not absolute

• Only peaceful, unarmed assembly is protected. Violence and property damage, which the panel is examining "on both sides", fall outside it [1].
• In Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018), the SC held that protest is a fundamental right. It added that this right must be balanced against residents' rights: protest may be regulated, but not banned outright [2].

Principles that should govern police force

• Legality: force must rest on clear law and recorded orders. It must never be used to punish dissent.
• Necessity: police should try non-violent means first and use force only if those fail [3].
• Proportionality: force must match the specific threat. Violence by a few cannot justify indiscriminate weapons like pellets fired into a whole crowd of students [3][4].
• Precaution: each less-lethal weapon needs its own rules to protect bystanders [4]. Policing must also be gender-sensitive, given the harassment allegations [1].
• Accountability: every injury must be reported, and superiors are liable for unlawful force they knew of and failed to stop [3]. Probes must be independent and protect witnesses. The panel's walk-in hearings and online portal for vulnerable witnesses are a good model [1].
• Oversight: states should set up the Police Complaints Authorities directed in Prakash Singh (2006) [5].

Way forward

• The MHA should frame a crowd-control SOP based on the OHCHR's 2020 guidance on less-lethal weapons [4].
• Officers at protests should be identifiable through name tags or service numbers.
• Protest permissions and venues should be easy to obtain, so anger is not pushed into unpermitted gatherings.
• The NTA must restore trust in NEET, which removes the root cause of the protests.

Taken together, these principles uphold both the right to protest and public order. Police who act with necessity, proportionality and accountability are not a threat to democratic protest; they help it work. This is how the Article 21 guarantee of bodily integrity and the ideal of constitutional morality can be met.