A petition has been moved in the Supreme Court challenging the prohibitory orders issued by the Delhi Police that prohibit five or more people from assembling in certain parts of the city. According to the plea, these orders, passed under the provisions of Section 144 of the CrPC, have caused severe inconveniences to the public and are violative of fundamental rights such as peaceful assembling and free movement in the city.Background: Section 144 and its Use in Delhi Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives the executive power to give orders in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger, to prohibit the assembly of five or more persons in an area. It is most oft brought into play in situations of issues of law and order which may include riots or protests, with the intention of trying to prevent it from taking on potential violent channels. However, its misuses by Delhi Police have recently posed an obvious query: Does it prove to be deployed rather too commonly or even redundantly these days?. In this case, the prohibitory orders issued by Delhi Police have led to a blanket ban on mass collection and congregations in some areas. Authorities claim this is necessary to preserve law and order in the public. The petitioner, however, contends that such orders cause turmoil in peoples lives, more so citizens who require collection for peaceful purposes like social events, religious events and community events. The Petition: Violation of Fundamental Rights The petitioner contended that such a blanket order of Section 144 in the absence of any particular reasons runs afoul of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. It is admitted that under Article 19(1)(b) the peaceful assembling right is safeguarded, and under Article 19(1)(d) the right to move freely in any part of the country is conferred on its citizens. According to the plea, indiscriminate use of prohibitory orders under Section 144 is arbitrary and excessive, because such prohibition does not even consider the proportionality of restriction vis-à-vis the threat to law and order alleged in the premises. For instance, the petitioners contend that these orders overwhelmingly affected ordinary citizens since they were disturbing the ability of ordinary citizens to join cultural, social and even private congregations and, therefore, were inconsistent with the fabric of public life. The appeal adds that such extraordinary blanket steps must be resorted only to in recognisably exceptional circumstances rather than being resorted to as a normal tool in the measures to limit crowds . Justification of the Government In response to the plea, the Delhi police has responded that prohibitory orders are only a temporary affair and necessary to maintain peace in the capital, particularly where at any point in time stray incidents begin to go out of control. Such restriction, according to this argument, is in public interest and based on the intelligence inputs regarding any threats the agencies feel. The government argues that the orders are necessary to prevent events that may develop into acts of chaos or violence.