38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, February 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Supreme Court Declines To Entertain Application For Removal Of Protesting Farmers From The Sindhu Border; States That They Are Not The Court Of First Instance

By LAWSTREET NEWS NETWORK      09 September, 2021 04:35 PM      0 Comments
Supreme Court Declines To Entertain Application For Removal Of Protesting Farmers From The Singhu Border; States That They Are Not The Court Of First Instance

On Monday, 6th September 2021 while hearing the matter of the Public Interest Litigation filed by the residents of Sonepat, Haryana against the farmers who are protesting and have allegedly blocked the Singhu Border which connects Haryana and Delhi, the bench consisting of  Justices D. Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli held that the Supreme Court cannot be called upon in such matters since there has been no gross infringement and that they cannot be the first instance court in such cases. 

BACKGROUND

The farmers have been protesting against the three agricultural laws included under the Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020; the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act 2020 on different borders of the country since 26th November 2020. 

Therefore, the farmers are sitting on the Singhu Border in protest which is causing a problem to the people travelling from Haryana and Delhi and hence the petition was filed. 

PETITIONERS COUNSEL 

The counsel relying the case in which the Supreme Court  Bench consisting of Justices S. K. Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy contended that the Bench had held that the farmers protest cannot block road traffic,  observing the situation of Monicca Agarwaal, the petitioner who had to travel from Noida to Delhi and due to the protest had asked to travel for two hours for reaching her office.

The counsel using this case as the precedent requested the Supreme Court to intervene in this case as well. 

OBSERVATION OF THE COURT 

The Bench of the esteemed judges held that since the matter is from Haryana, the petition should be filed under the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Honble judges also held that the High Court would be more aware of the situation of the local area than the apex Court and therefore the petition should be filed there instead of the Supreme Court.

Furthermore, the Bench stated that the High Court is responsible for finding a peaceful solution to resolve the issue of a balance between the right to protest and the right to access basic amenities". 

The Bench also emphasized the need of the citizens to have faith in the judgement for the High Court. 



Share this article:

About:

Explore Comprehensive Legal Reporting with LawStreet Journal: Your Go-To Source for Supreme Court an...Read more

Follow:
TwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

gauhati-hc-quashes-case-against-influencer-who-claimed-assamese-women-practise-black-magic-and-convert-men-into-animals
Trending Judiciary
Gauhati HC Quashes Case Against Influencer Who Claimed Assamese Women Practise Black Magic and Convert Men Into Animals [Read Order]

Gauhati High Court quashes case against influencer Abhishek Kar over remarks on black magic in Assam, holds offences under BNS, IT Act not made out.

11 February, 2026 03:08 PM
high-courts-cannot-nullify-arbitration-proceedings-while-substituting-arbitrators-sc
Trending Judiciary
High Courts Cannot Nullify Arbitration Proceedings While Substituting Arbitrators: SC [Read Order]

Supreme Court rules High Courts cannot nullify arbitration proceedings while appointing substitute arbitrators under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act.

11 February, 2026 03:58 PM

TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email