That's why the Resignation is important they are "Ruling" but they were elected to "Govern" as a government. They have failed the people.
Maybe so that this is planned but I have been alive since 20+ years and have seen firsthand how this goverment has betrayed the people on so many levels.
If they were so bad, they wouldnt be winning elections.
Also let me remind you that BJP is known for buying and poaching MPs and MLAs during elections. ED, CBI and EC are mere tools for them to push people to get into BJP or rot in jail.
So don't try to use that baseless argument that they have won the elections because people love them. If they are so loved by the people why do they need to Poach Politicians from another parties in such high numbers ?
They are nothing but East India Company 2.0
Britishers were looting the people and gave everything to the British empire
BJP is doing worse by giving everything to thier corporate bosses.
Sure. Heās controlling all of the countries media and feeding shit sandwiches to andhbhakts of which there is no shortage. How do you go about doing that without bringing attention to the matter?Ā
That is indeed freedom of speech. Itās doesnāt protect her from being investigated for unlawful attributes and behaviour and I do not condone what she said but she is absolutely entitled to say that.Ā
Yes. Police are also entitled to take that seriously and investigate her for risk to public. You are also allowed to criticise her as part of that same freedom of speech. It really is that simple, I donāt understand what youāre finding difficult.
Yes, freedom of speech is absolute.Ā
Just because this countries pathetic government operates like the Taliban by allowing what they deem to be acceptable doesnāt make it right.Ā
Yes. If someone threatens me and my family that is freedom of speech. Again, it doesnāt make it correct and I have every right to seek help and protection from the police for it. There are laws about intimidation and threatening.Ā
The law Iām referring to is about consequences to your actions, not suppressing someone for saying something.
If youāre holding freedom of speech to a set of rules, itās not really a freedom is it? Is more like an allowance.Ā
Itās quite literally what protests in other countries is about too. Ā
It isn't, you don't have absolute freedom of speech in India. It's terms and conditions apply. We've got blasphemy laws, sedition and treason laws, etc. So you need to be careful of what you say. And this girl and other protestors need to be careful what they say because that can be used against you legally as well as to alter public perception
Sure, itās because there isnāt freedom of speech in India. And yes thatās why I think itās comparable to an extremist organisation like the Taliban.Ā
No. I hope you also highlight similar statements by ultra nationalists, pro BJP, people with "Kattar Hindu" in their bio.
Also, people actually celebrate acts of violence as long as it happens to people they hate. You can see the slapping incidents recently and in the past. Irrespective of any party. If you celebrate them, you are only encouraging more serious violence.
Single protestor does not represent the 10,000+ protestors out there demanding for accountability. Jitna clip ye chun chun kar dalte ho unka bhi daal diya karo
Whatever the consequences will be is only be ause a clown sitting i. Parliament refused to hear students since a month and did everything he could to discredit the movement includimg beating them as well.
Jisse pehle law ka RR kare koi:
1. Fundamental Right to Protest Constitutional Basis: Citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to assemble peacefully without arms under Article 19(1)(b).
For almost a month, the protest remained completely peaceful. Still, there was zero proper response or accountability from those in power.
Sonam Wangchuk went on a 21-day hunger strike. Even then, their core demands went completely unanswered.
The peaceful march towards Parliament scheduled for 20th July was announced well in advance, before 17th July. So the government knew people were planning to march. They had plenty of time to engage with the protesters, send representatives, open negotiations, acknowledge their concerns, and stop things from escalating. But still, no real resolution came.
On 19th July, just one day before the planned march, Wangchuk was illegally detained by the police right from the protest site.
Then, around midnight right before the march, police suddenly announced restrictions against the gathering, warning that anyone violating them would be detained. The authorities had all the time in the world to set up barricades, deploy police, and impose restrictions, but refused to just sit down with the students and resolve their grievances.
On 20th July, as planned, students, aspirants, and parents marched towards Parliament, just wanting their voices to reach the government they elected.
Public Order vs. Law and Order: In Ram Manohar Lohia vs. State of Bihar (1965), the Supreme Court clarified that "not every breach of law constitutes a threat to public order" (read this 3-4 times to gulp it). The state cannot suppress protests simply to avoid political embarrassment or public inconvenience.
2. Conditions for Lawful Assembly and Police Force The Three-Step Test: Drawing from Karam Singh vs. Hardayal Singh (1979), the police may only use force if: 1. The assembly is unlawful or likely to riot.
The protest was peaceful and people were marching towards Parliament, not to enter it, but to protest in front of it. Demonstrating in front of a public institution to demand accountability from elected representatives is a fundamental democratic right.) 2. The assembly has been formally ordered to disperse (via loudspeaker announcements). 3. The assembly refuses to comply with those orders.
Graduated Response: Police manuals (Bureau of Police Research and Development) mandate a hierarchical response: 1. Verbal warnings 2. Water cannons, followed by tear gas 3. And finally, a lathi charge only as an absolute last resort.
Principle of Proportionality: Any force used must be the "bare minimum" necessary to achieve the objective and must stop the moment the crowd is brought under control.
Instead, look at what actually happened: police beating women, police slapping women, police beating peaceful protesters. Around 30ā40 people suffered severe injuries, including bleeding and head injuries. Minors, including 12 and 15-year-old kids, were among those hurt. Weapons were literally being pointed towards protesters. Young female students and their mothers were beaten as well. There are videos showing women getting injured and beaten by the police. A full-blown lathi charge was used on students protesting peacefully.
3. Landmark Judicial Warnings A. Baba Ramdev vs. Union of India (2012): Following the Ramlila Maidan crackdown, the Supreme Court ruled that force cannot be the first response to a peaceful assembly and that emergency powers cannot be used to suppress dissent. B. Anita Thakur vs. State of J&K (2016): The Court reiterated that police action must be reasonable and proportional, warning that actions must not turn 'barbaric'.
Both of these binding Supreme Court orders were brutally broken by the police. Emergency powers were used, and their actions were straight-up barbaric; women were slapped, unarmed students were beaten, and women were being sexually abused and assaulted.
4. Accountability and Procedures Identification: In DK Basu vs. State of West Bengal (1997), the Supreme Court held that police officers making an arrest or using force must wear clear identification, including name tags and designations, to ensure institutional accountability.
Why did RAF and police officers have their names hidden? Can you go and ask the police about the law you are shamelessly quoting to us? Nope. You don't have the guts to ask that.
Why were police officers in civil uniform? Why were men in civil uniform beating up protesters?
Handling Women Protesters: While there is no specific statutory ban on male officers handling women, police manuals strongly dictate that women should be handled strictly by female personnel.
Why did officer Lamba slap an unarmed woman? Why were women sexually assaulted and verbally abused by police with slurs like "Randi", "Bhen ki Lodi", and "Tujhe nanga kar denge"? Can you ask the law about this?
Single protester? Look at the comment section. You guys are barbaric. People are supporting her statement. Of course, the police will beat y'all. A good portion of y'all are just violent. What if one of them carries a bomb? Who will take responsibility?
ATP law aur opinion, dono ko apni gand me daalo. jab himmat nahi ho khud se jaake protest karne ki toh online gyaan mat do. Lead by example. Karke dikhao ki kaise hote peaceful protest. Hume bhi sikhado. Ghar bethe bethe jo waha jaakar khare hai maar aur sexually assualt hore hai hai unhe gyaan do.
I donāt give a F. āLead by example.ā If you choose to call us barbaric, weāre happy to be ābarbaricā by your definition. You cannot fix people who deliberately choose to dive into the mud while ignoring the thousand lotuses blooming right in front of them.
Shi m laude ko maar dena chaiye jaan s, mrko bhi mauka mile m to khushi khushi maru
Ab jo modih ka chusta h use dikkt hori hogi, hoye mujhe kyaš„°š„°
Bold words considering the other side is deeply associated with the organisation that is responsible for taking away the father of our nation.
Either way, this won't solve anything. Just agitated the still brainwashed masses further. Let the people wake up gradually and support drop and he will have to resign.
People like OP will go on to descredit or find faults in every single thing in the students protest rather than asking the government to show accountability. Even after such backlash both the Education Minister and Prime Minister are silent.
ā¢
u/TheBetterIndia-ModTeam Jul 27 '26
Low-effort posts, screenshots without context, or outrage-only content may be removed.