It also observed that she had only urged citizens to support the labourers and not called for violence.
It added that the State must train the police force in ensuring public order in such large gatherings and also resort to videography of the gathering so that accountability may be affixed, in the event of an outbreak of violence.
The Court also reminded the State that preventing people from gathering in public spaces or agitating their rights on the grounds of assumed breach of peace, would be throwing the baby out of the bathwater.
"If such a view is taken by the State and approved of by the Courts, it would lead to a cessation of the collective expression of opinion in public spaces.
The Constitution protects such a right and the same cannot be trifled with merely on the subjective opinion of the State," the Court said.
The Court made these observations in its judgment quashing the preventive detention of Akriti Chaudhary, a History graduate from Delhi University, who was detained under the National Security Act (NSA) in connection with the protest of industrial workers in April in Noida
The Court found that there was no material to warrant her detention under NSA. It also observed that she had only urged citizens to support the labourers and not called for violence.
In this backdrop, the Court emphasised that freedom of speech and expression extends to coming out on the streets and agitating a cause, and gathering peacefully without arms or without threat to the public order.
However, it flagged that a peaceful agitation can be scuttled by mischievous elements interested in ensuring that such an agitation is broken and acts of violence get attributed to the entire group.
It added that the State must train the police force in ensuring public order in such large gatherings and also resort to videography of the gathering so that accountability may be affixed, in the event of an outbreak of violence.
The Court also reminded the State that preventing people from gathering in public spaces or agitating their rights on the grounds of assumed breach of peace, would be throwing the baby out of the bathwater.
"If such a view is taken by the State and approved of by the Courts, it would lead to a cessation of the collective expression of opinion in public spaces. The Constitution protects such a right and the same cannot be trifled with merely on the subjective opinion of the State," the Court said.
