Petitioners in a Bombay High Court case on protests blocking Pune’s public roads and bridges have served a notice seeking removal of the ongoing demonstration at S.M. Joshi Bridge near Patrakar Bhavan within 12 hours of receipt, warning that they may seek contempt proceedings if it continues in the manner alleged.
The notice, dated October 9, was issued by Amit Balu Supekar and Sourabh P. Virkar, petitioners in Writ Petition No. 13357 of 2026. It was addressed to Pramod Dattatray Patil, who is associated with the protest. The petitioners have asked for the gathering to be shifted to an authorised alternative location and for the bridge and adjoining road to be cleared.
According to the notice, the petition was filed on October 6 after residents and commuters allegedly faced difficulties because protests were being held without permission on public roads and bridges. During the October 7 hearing, the petitioners say Patil’s counsel, Mayur Khandeparkar, assured the court that Patil would seek a suitable alternative protest site if required and would not inconvenience the public.
The notice further states that the court recorded assurances that protests would continue lawfully at locations where permission had been obtained, without blockading public roads or bridges. It also says the court directed the State to take reasonable steps to maintain the free flow of traffic.
The petitioners have separately cited an October 7 communication from the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Special Branch, Pune City. According to their notice, police had refused permission for the protest at Ladkat Chowk and S.M. Joshi Bridge and directed that the site be vacated immediately. The communication allegedly indicated that an application for an alternative location, including the premises around the Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar statue or the Pune Collector’s Office, could be considered favourably.
The petitioners allege that a large gathering continued to obstruct the bridge and adjoining road on October 9. They have also alleged loudspeaker use between approximately 2 a.m. and 3 a.m., restrictions on residents’ movement and instances in which ambulances were stopped and checked before being allowed to pass. These allegations are contained in the petitioners’ notice and have not been independently established in the supplied report.
Their demands include removal of the gathering from the bridge, relocation to an authorised site, unobstructed passage for emergency vehicles, compliance with applicable noise rules and a written response from Patil’s advocate detailing the steps taken. The notice warns that the petitioners will approach the Bombay High Court and initiate contempt proceedings if the protest continues beyond the stipulated period in the manner described.
The next hearing in the writ petition is scheduled for November 25, 2026. Until then, the case places the management of protest sites against the need to preserve traffic movement, residential access and emergency connectivity on Pune’s public road network.
