- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Bombay High Court
- /
- Bombay High Court Seeks Mumbai...
Bombay High Court Seeks Mumbai Police's Stand On CPI(M)'s Plea To Hold Peaceful Protest Against Genocide In Gaza
Narsi Benwal
11 Aug 2025 10:09 PM IST
The Bombay High Court on Monday (August 11) ordered the Mumbai Police to specify its stand on the plea filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) to hold peaceful protests and call for a ceasefire in Palestine and condemn the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Notably, this is the second time when the CPI(M) has knocked the doors of the High Court seeking permission to protest the genocide in Gaza...
The Bombay High Court on Monday (August 11) ordered the Mumbai Police to specify its stand on the plea filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) to hold peaceful protests and call for a ceasefire in Palestine and condemn the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
Notably, this is the second time when the CPI(M) has knocked the doors of the High Court seeking permission to protest the genocide in Gaza as in its earlier round of litigation, the party was criticised by the bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad for not taking up issues that affect the citizens of India and instead focusing on fights taking place, thousands of miles away. In fact, the bench had asked the party to 'be patriots' underlining that merely speaking up for Gaza is not 'patriotism.'
The CPI (M) through senior advocate Mihir Desai has now challenged the July 31, 2025 order passed by the Mumbai Police, which for the third time rejected the party's application to hold protests at Azad Maidan, the designated protests site in the city.
On Monday, the matter came up for hearing before the same bench, which directed additional public prosecutor Shreekant Gavand to take instructions from the Mumbai Police and adjourned the hearing till Tuesday.
In its petition, the CPI (M) has stated that it is aggrieved by the arbitrary and unjust action of the Police Authorities in rejecting the applications through orders passed on June 19, July 15 and July 31. The police refused to permit the petitioner party to hold a peaceful protest and gathering in Azad Maidan to show solidarity with the people of Gaza, who are currently facing a genocide and blocking of humanitarian aid and in solidarity with the international movement to call a ceasefire in Palestine.
Thus, the petitioners through the instant petition, have sought a direction to the authorities to permit them to hold a peaceful protest at Azad Maidan to condemn the genocide ongoing in Gaza.
"The authorities in their order rejecting the application on July 31, 2025, have mentioned that since the agenda of the protest deals with an international issue, the repercussions of carry out the protest would be felt at an international level. The order also mentions that various social and international organisations are opposed to the agenda of the protest. It further highlight the reactions of such opposing organisations are being posted on social media platforms and there there is a situation of law and order arising if the said protest is allowed," the plea states.
The reasons, the party has contended are untenable as the agenda of the protest is to call for a ceasefire and to end the genocide in Gaza, which is similar to the stand of the Indian Government.
"The same is in line with the official stance of the Indian Government, wherein the Ministry of External Affairs has consistently held the view that a ceasefire must be called to put an end to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The same is evidence as per the information put up by the Ministry of External Affairs," the petition reads.
The matter will be heard again on Tuesday.
It would not be out of place to mention that soon after the July 25 order, the CPI (M) had condemned the observations of the bench by issuing a public statement through a press release. The same was highlighted before the judges by a senior advocate, who urged them to initiate Suo Motu contempt of court proceedings against the said party.
However, the judges said they would prefer to ignore the said statements and refused to initiate contempt proceedings.