A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Delhi High Court challenging the alleged continuous and intrusive surveillance of peaceful protesters at Jantar Mantar by the Delhi Police during an ongoing sit-in protest and hunger strike organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).
The petition alleged that the blanket surveillance violated the fundamental rights to privacy, dignity, freedom of speech and expression, and peaceful assembly guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The PIL has been filed by former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) president and CPI(M) leader Aishe Ghosh through Advocates Subhash Chandran KR and Anirudh KP. It is likely to be listed for hearing before the High Court on July 16.
According to the petition, the protest has remained peaceful since it commenced on June 20 under the leadership of student activist Abhijeet Dipke. Despite the absence of any allegation of unlawful activity, the Delhi Police has allegedly subjected participants to continuous photography, videography and round-the-clock monitoring through a permanent surveillance tower equipped with cameras installed at the designated protest site.
The plea contends that the surveillance is indiscriminate and extends to every individual present at the venue irrespective of any suspicion of criminal conduct. It alleges that the monitoring is not confined to public demonstrations but also captures routine personal activities such as eating, resting, seeking medical assistance and other private moments, thereby amounting to an unlawful invasion of privacy.
The petitioner has further alleged that police personnel threatened student protesters by stating that photographs and videos taken during the protest would be forwarded to their parents, guardians and educational institutions.
According to the plea, such threats have created an atmosphere of intimidation and fear, discouraging students and other citizens from participating in lawful democratic protests and thereby producing a chilling effect on the exercise of the freedoms guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.
The petition also raises concerns regarding the treatment of women protesters. It alleges that during heavy rainfall, women who were compelled to remain at the protest site in drenched clothing due to the absence of adequate shelter continued to be photographed and videographed by police personnel, resulting in a serious intrusion into their bodily privacy and dignity.
It further claims that police repeatedly conducted route marches through the protest site and stopped vehicles carrying protesters for questioning, portraying peaceful demonstrators as though they were engaged in unlawful activities.
The PIL states that despite repeated requests, the authorities have failed to disclose the statutory basis, executive instructions or procedural safeguards governing the surveillance exercise. It alleges that no information has been provided regarding the purpose of the surveillance, the duration of data retention, the manner in which personal data is processed or stored, or the protocols regulating its dissemination.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in *Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India*, the petition argues that the impugned surveillance measures fail to satisfy the constitutional requirements of legality, necessity, proportionality, and procedural safeguards.
It further contends that the installation of a permanent surveillance tower and blanket deployment of videographers do not satisfy the constitutional doctrine of the least restrictive means and cannot be justified merely on the grounds of maintaining public order or national security without an express statutory framework and judicial oversight.
The petitioner has sought a declaration that continuous and intrusive mass surveillance of peaceful protesters at designated protest sites is unconstitutional and disproportionate. The plea also seeks immediate suspension of all mass photography, videography and surveillance at Jantar Mantar until the respondents establish the existence of a proximate, real and imminent threat to public order warranting such measures.
Additionally, the petition seeks directions to the authorities to disclose the legal authority, threat assessment, purpose, scope, data retention policy and data-sharing protocols governing the surveillance exercise.
It also seeks preservation of all surveillance records, metadata and internal communications, restraint on deletion or dissemination of surveillance material pending adjudication, destruction of personal data collected through the surveillance except where required for an ongoing criminal investigation, framing of comprehensive guidelines governing surveillance at peaceful assemblies, constitution of an independent committee to examine the extent and impact of surveillance at Jantar Mantar, and provision of essential civic amenities, including drinking water, sanitation and emergency medical facilities, at the protest site.
The post Petition filed in Delhi High Court challenges surveillance of CJP protesters by Delhi Police appeared first on India Legal.