The Congress on Thursday launched a forceful critique of the government over criminal charges filed against individuals who took part in what it described as a peaceful political protest, terming the action a “criminalisation of dissent” and a serious blow to democratic freedoms.
Addressing a press conference in the national capital, senior Congress leader and spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the charges were not supported by facts available in the public domain and appeared aimed at intimidating critics.
“This is criminalisation of dissent,” Singhvi said. “The characterisation of the incident as one involving organised violence, sinister intent, or pre-meditated wrongdoing is not borne out by the factual matrix presently available in the public domain, and raises serious questions of fairness, neutrality, and equal application of law.”
Singhvi underscored that the protest was recorded on video and widely circulated across social media and news platforms, asserting that the prosecution could not construct a narrative inconsistent with the visual record.
“The prosecution cannot advance a version inconsistent with the contemporaneous video record,” he said, adding that no evidence had emerged of violence, property damage or threat to public safety.
He also flagged procedural concerns, stating that copies of the FIR had not been provided to the concerned individuals or their legal representatives despite repeated requests.
Referring to proceedings before the Patiala House Court, Singhvi said the court had directed the police to furnish copies of the FIR and observed that the allegations lacked the hallmarks of terrorism.
“Upon reviewing the charges, no prima facie case can be found,” he asserted. “The sections invoked are wholly inapplicable. Terms like ‘terrorism’ and ‘anti-national’ are completely misplaced.”
Rejecting claims that the protest involved organised violence or premeditated wrongdoing, Singhvi called such allegations a distortion of democratic activity.
“Criminal law cannot be invoked merely on the basis of expressive political messaging in a peaceful protest, in the absence of any cognisable offence,” he said.
Citing constitutional safeguards, Singhvi referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan vs Union of India, which affirmed that the right to protest is intrinsic to democratic participation and accountability.
“Peaceful or symbolic political protest, even if vocally critical or inconvenient to authority, lies squarely within the protected zone of democratic expression,” he said. “In a democracy, dissent is not treason. It is duty.”
He maintained that raising concerns over policies affecting farmers, youth and small businesses could not be equated with criminality.
“Raising the concerns of farmers, youth and small businesses is not rebellion; it is a constitutional right,” he added.
Singhvi suggested that the arrests reflected a broader pattern of suppressing scrutiny and discouraging young voices from participating in political discourse.
“Democracy is not fragile porcelain that cracks at the sound of a slogan,” he remarked. “Proportionality is a constitutional discipline of power.”
Accusing the government of overreach, he said, “When government signs agreements that threaten livelihoods and weaken economic sovereignty, opposing it becomes a responsibility, not a violation.”
In a sharp comment, Singhvi added, “The government has completely lost its equilibrium. The more it tries to sensationalise the issue, the more these young individuals are elevated and the cause further gets highlighted.
The controversy unfolds against the backdrop of heightened political tensions, with opposition parties alleging shrinking democratic space, while the ruling establishment has insisted that law and order must be upheld firmly.
The Congress, however, maintained that the distinction between dissent and disorder must remain clear.
“Dissent is a constitutional right, not sedition,” Singhvi said, arguing that the strength of a democracy lies not in the absence of protest, but in its ability to accommodate and protect it.