Bombay HC: People can’t be barred from protesting, saying ‘BJP Government Murdabad’ or ‘Amit Shah Murdabad’ is right to express dissension. The Bombay High Court on July 2, 2026, was faced with a question of the rights of citizens against the policies of the government. This was seen in a case related to Mumbai Police’s decision to extern a Socialist Democratic Party of India (SDPI) activist, Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, from specific areas for protesting against policies like the Citizenship Act amendment and the Gyanvapi Masjid issue.
Freedom to Protest:
The court while heading a bench including Justice Madhav Jamdar observed that opposing the actions of the government and expressing dissent, such as chanting “BJP Government Murdabad or ‘Amit Shah Murdabad’,” is a constitutional right and a citizen is free to voice their opinions.
Justice Jamdar: “What is this? All citizens are being made slaves of Indian Government… They cannot stage protests, they cannot agitate- what is all this? Now so many papers have been leaked. If people protest, you will slap cases… What is this? It is the right of the citizens to protest…. The petitioner has just raised slogans like ‘BJP Government Murdabad’, ‘Amit Shah Murdabad’… Why citizens can’t raise such slogans? Why externment orders for such slogans?”
Criticism of Police Actions:
Justice Madhav Jamdar had condemned the move by the police for interfering with the citizens’ rights. The judge pointed out that it’s not fair to remove someone from certain areas just because of protests, emphasizing that relying on multiple FIRs for such actions isn’t the right approach. He stated that police should be accountable to the public and cannot act simply as agents of government ministers.
Justice Jamdar : “Police isn’t the servants of the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister they are public servants… I am going to impose hefty costs on your officers…”
Political Situation:
The ruling was based on the current politics in Maharashtra and talked about the act of opportunists switching parties, which has now come to be referred to as horse-trading. The judge had sarcastically remarked that while these are serious things going on, we find leaders moving to different parties every other day, as the politician can “eat this side as well as the other side”.
Justice Jamdar :”Day before yesterday, one 10 year child was killed in an accident and what the State Assembly was discussing – how a Presiding Officer is elected and how he has shifted from one party to the another… What is this? Even you (Saeed) should switch sides… anyways horse trading is going on in entire Maharashtra. You (Saeed) have some FIRs… consider switching cases, there is a washing machine,”
Legal Implications:
The externment was also deemed a mala fide action, which has the element of bad faith. The High Court set aside the externment order of Chaudhary by holding that one cannot be deprived of their rights when they oppose a policy or decision of the government.
Underlining Rights:
Justice Jamdar: “The Petitioner acting in his capacity has arranged Morchas and Dharnas against certain decisions taken by the Government of India. That cannot be a ground for a person to be externed under the Maharashtra Police Act. The action taken is mala fide action. Accordingly writ is disposed of with the quashing of the externment order. As per the Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India not only citizens have the freedom to express their opinion but also to live with dignity. The action taken by the respondents against the petitioner for merely opposing certain decisions of the Government of India affects his fundamental rights,”
Quotes Ref: LiveLaw
Also Read: