Bombay High Court Directs Protestors Seeking Maratha Reservation To Vacate Mumbai Roads By Tomorrow

Update: 2025-09-01 12:40 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Bombay High Court today (September 01) directed activist Manoj Jarange and his supporters, who are protesting for Maratha reservations to vacate all streets and restore normalcy in Mumbai by tomorrow. Jarange has been on a hunger strike at Azad Maidan since Friday (August 29), demanding 10 percent reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education under the Other...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Bombay High Court today (September 01) directed activist Manoj Jarange and his supporters, who are protesting for Maratha reservations to vacate all streets and restore normalcy in Mumbai by tomorrow.

Jarange has been on a hunger strike at Azad Maidan since Friday (August 29), demanding 10 percent reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. His supporters said he stopped consuming water from Monday.

A bench of Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad said that the ongoing agitation led by Jarange has brought the city to a standstill and has not remained peaceful.

The Court also directed the government to ensure that no more protesters enter the city and to provide medical assistance to Jarange, if his health deteriorated.

The development comes in a special hearing held by the Court amid despite Ganesh festival holiday, considering the inconvenience caused to people due to the protests.

The court observed that protesters had moved beyond Azad Maidan— the designated protest site, and gathered at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus, Churchgate station, Marine Drive and even outside the High Court building, blocking entry gates and disrupting movement of judges and lawyers. It remarked that Mumbai had come to a halt, with protesters occupying the streets and even using it for daily activities.

The Court gave Jarange and his supporters one final opportunity to clear and clean the streets by Tuesday. It said the conditions imposed for a peaceful protest had been violated and Jarange's assurance to the police had not been honoured. The court noted that access to the High Court building had been obstructed, vehicles of judges had been blocked and normal functioning across the city was severely hampered.

The judges also pointed out that Jarange had openly declared he would fast until death and remain in Mumbai until his demands were accepted. They said his assurances about avoiding disruption had been broken and questioned why the state had not yet taken steps to clear the roads.

The bench added that while every citizen has a right to protest, it must be exercised peacefully and within legal limits. It reiterated its earlier order of August 26 that protests must strictly comply with Rules.

In that order, the court had directed that protesters could not stage any protest at Azad Maidan without first obtaining permission under the Public Meetings, Agitations and Processions Rules, 2025, which had been notified the same day under Section 33 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

The order had also permitted the State to offer an alternative venue at Khargar in Navi Mumbai to avoid disruption during the Ganpati festival from August 29 to September 6. It emphasised that demonstrations must be held only at designated places and in a peaceful manner, in line with the Supreme Court's ruling in Amit Sahni (Shaheen Bagh, In Re) v. Commissioner of Police. The Court had directed that the protestors strictly abide by any conditions imposed by the competent authority while granting permission under the new rules.

Today, Advocate General Birendra Saraf said that permission for the protest was only valid until August 29 and that all conditions had been breached. He added that the authorities were balancing law enforcement with the sensitivities of the ongoing Ganesh festival and avoiding harsh police measures that could have adverse consequences.

The matter will be heard next on Tuesday.

Case no. – Public Interest Litigation (L) No. 25656 of 2025

Case Title – AMY Foundation v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Full View

Tags:    

Similar News