Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Saturday voiced concern over what he described as the narrowing space for dissent in India, observing that citizens exercising their constitutional right to protest are increasingly facing criminal prosecution. He also questioned whether delayed judicial relief and stringent bail conditions were discouraging the exercise of fundamental freedoms. Delivering the Justice G.P. Singh Fourth Memorial Lecture at the National Law Institute University (NLIU) in Bhopal, Justice Bhuyan said democracy thrives on debate and disagreement, but routine acts of protest are increasingly attracting criminal action. "Public space for expressing divergent opinions is shrinking," he said, adding that the rights to free expression and peaceful assembly are guaranteed under the Constitution. "Debate and dissent are the essence of democracy. Unfortunately, even normal activities are being criminalised."
While acknowledging that courts often intervene to protect individual liberty, Justice Bhuyan said such relief frequently comes too late to be meaningful. "Courts do grant bail and other reliefs, but many a times the relief is delayed. Equally worrying are the restrictive conditions imposed while granting bail. One has to ask whether such conditions indirectly discourage citizens from exercising their right to dissent," he remarked.
To illustrate his concern, Justice Bhuyan referred to the arrest of fourteen Muslim men who were detained after consuming chicken biryani while breaking their Ramzan fast on a boat in the Ganga. "I am certain that eating chicken biryani is not an offence. There is no law prohibiting consumption of chicken over the Ganga. Yet they remained in jail for three months," he said. He also noted that courts have, in some cases, imposed bail conditions preventing accused persons from attending public gatherings, posting on social media or travelling abroad. Such restrictions, he suggested, raise important constitutional questions about the balance between individual liberty and criminal proceedings.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to a July 2025 Bombay High Court order refusing permission to the Communist Party of India (Marxist) to hold a demonstration at Mumbai's Azad Maidan against the alleged genocide in Gaza. Recalling the court's observations asking why citizens were protesting over events outside India, Justice Bhuyan said he found those remarks "quite amusing". The judge emphasised that judicial decisions are not beyond public scrutiny and encouraged law students to engage critically with court rulings. "Criticism of a judgment is not criticism of the judge. Judgments must be examined, debated and, where necessary, criticised. That is how the law evolves," he said.
Referring to important Supreme Court verdicts, including the judgment upholding reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), he urged students not to accept judicial decisions uncritically. "If everyone simply praises judges and tells them they are always right, how will the institution improve?" he asked. Justice Bhuyan concluded by stressing that the judiciary's legitimacy ultimately depends on public confidence rather than its own assessment of its authority. "It is not for judges to declare how great the Supreme Court is. The real test lies in how citizens perceive the institution after 75 years of the Republic. Public trust is what gives the judiciary its legitimacy," he said.
Calling for greater introspection within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan said constructive criticism and open public debate would ultimately strengthen both the courts and India's democratic institutions.