The Delhi High Court has ruled that the right to associate with a political party and actively participate in politics forms part of the protection guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee made the observation while directing the Delhi Police to provide protection to an advocate who alleged repeated threats from political rivals.
Court Explains Scope of Article 21
The Court held that Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. It further clarified that this protection includes autonomy to make personal choices. Such autonomy, the Court said, covers the freedom to associate with a political party and to engage in political activities in a manner a citizen considers appropriate.
The judge stated that any interference or coercion affecting such choices strikes at the core of individual liberty and safety. He added that the petitioner is fully entitled to protection under Article 21.
Advocate Alleges Persistent Threats
The petitioner submitted that he has faced threats since 2016. Following the initial threats, police registered an FIR at Harsh Vihar Police Station.
Although the parties reportedly settled the matter after assurances from the accused, the petitioner claimed that intimidation resumed in 2022 after one accused secured release from jail.
He further stated that he received a WhatsApp call threatening to kill him if he did not withdraw from political activities. According to him, rival party members continued to intimidate him by sharing photographs and videos on social media showing them firing firearms.
Police later registered another FIR under provisions of the Arms Act.
The petitioner also expressed concern about suspicious individuals allegedly surveying his residence late at night in December 2025.
Court Directs Police Protection
After considering the allegations, the Court directed the SHO and the Beat Constable of Police Station Harsh Vihar to remain available. It ordered them to provide necessary assistance and protection to the petitioner whenever required, in accordance with law.
The Court also clarified that if the petitioner shifts to another area, he must inform the concerned SHO. Upon receiving such information, that SHO must extend similar protection.
Case Details
Title: Vikas Pundhir v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
