Delhi High Court declines PIL seeking review of Parliament security

Published 5 August 2026 · local

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (August 5, 2026) declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking a review of the safety and security of

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (August 5, 2026) declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking a review of the safety and security of Parliament, observing that such matters fall within the domain of the executive and Parliament itself. A Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said the Court could not issue directions on how Parliament should manage its administrative or operational affairs. “These are not the functions of the court. How can any such direction be issued with respect to the functioning of Parliament? You think the Parliament of this country is incapable of taking care of its own security?

What kind of a petition is this? We are there to give directions to Parliament as to how their administrative and operational mechanisms should function?” the Bench told the petitioner’s counsel. The petition, filed by one Raj Singh, referred to the 2001 terrorist attack on Parliament and the 2023 security breach to argue that the existing security framework required a fresh review. The petitioner’s counsel emphasised that in a parliamentary democracy, the “Parliament is paramount” and reviewing its safety was the “need of the hour”. “Stampede occurring in a railway station, you don’t see. Security concerns being faced by pedestrians, you don’t see.

Security concerns being faced by morning walkers, you don’t see. Security of daily passengers going to railway stations is not a concern?” the Court remarked. The plea said the issue of reviewing Parliament’s security assumed greater significance due to the increasing frequency of demonstrations directed towards lawmakers. “Calls for citizens to assemble or march towards Parliament (Sansad Chalo) have become a recurring feature of democratic mobilisation across a range of public issues. While peaceful assembly and freedom of expression remain constitutionally protected, such developments also underline the necessity of ensuring that the existing security framework remains capable of simultaneously safeguarding democratic participation and protecting the institutional integrity and uninterrupted functioning of Parliament,” the petition said.

It therefore sought a direction to the Centre, as well as the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariats, to “undertake a comprehensive review of the existing institutional framework governing the safety, security, resilience and uninterrupted constitutional functioning of the Parliament of India, including its administrative, institutional, operational, technological and cyber-security mechanisms, in light of evolving security challenges and emerging threats.”