New Delhi, Jan 22 (.) The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to issue nationwide mandatory guidelines to prevent stampedes at political rallies and large public gatherings, holding that crowd management and safety protocols fall within the domain of executive authorities and experts.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi was hearing a writ petition seeking directions to the union of India and the Election Commission of India to formulate a National Crowd Management and Safety Code and standard operating procedures (SOPs) to curb stampede-related fatalities across the country.
The petitioner contended that nearly 4,000 people had lost their lives in stampede incidents over the past two decades, attributing the recurring tragedies to the absence of a national policy, uniform SOPs, and even a statutory definition of the term “stampede.”
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate G. Priyadharshni, along with AoR Rahul Shyam Bhandari, urged the Court to lay down minimum benchmarks, pointing out that while some States have guidelines for political rallies, others do not.
Expressing reservations, the Bench questioned the feasibility of judicially enforceable directions.
“Can we issue these kinds of directions? Is it possible to comply with such directions?” the Court asked, cautioning against orders that could prove “unmanageable” at the ground level.
Illustrating the concern, the Bench referred to political rallies, observing that while authorities can designate venues and regulate protests to ensure public life is not disrupted, courts cannot realistically cap attendance based on venue capacity.
“If a ground can accommodate 10,000 people and 50,000 turn up, what do you do?” the Chief Justice observed.
While acknowledging that certain regulatory measures such as designated protest spaces and special safeguards for senior citizens, schoolchildren, and patients, are permissible, the Bench remained unconvinced that comprehensive crowd-control norms could be judicially mandated without practical enforcement challenges.
The order records that the petition sought directions for mandatory crowd-control guidelines, a centralised digital platform to regulate political rallies nationwide, and a National Crowd Management and Safety Code incorporating real-time surveillance, risk audits, and the use of modern technology at major public places.
Ultimately, the Court held that the reliefs sought were “essentially for formulation of a policy,” an area better left to the executive and law enforcement agencies.
Permitting the petitioner to pursue representations before the union government, the Court allowed the writ petition to be submitted as a representation to the Election Commission of India.
Leaving the matter to the “competent authorities,” the Supreme Court declined to issue directions, while allowing authorities to consider the suggestions and take appropriate action if deemed necessary.
The petitioner, a former MLA, union Cabinet Minister, Rajya Sabha MP, and ex-Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture, stated that his long public life and direct exposure to the suffering of victims prompted the plea.
He claimed to have witnessed deaths caused by suffocation and the absence of crowd control, medical facilities, signage, trained marshals, and police guidance.
The petition also highlighted the disruption of civic life due to unregulated rallies and roadshows, alleging blockage of ambulances, delays to patients, disruption to students reaching examination centres, and commuters missing flights and trains.
Among the key provisions were restrictions on rallies on roads narrower than four lanes, confining events to designated grounds and maidans, mandatory pre-event safety certification, and enhanced supervisory powers for the Election Commission to cancel unsafe rallies and penalise violators during election periods.
. SNG MI RB 1557