Supreme Court Sunday Hearing: No Illegal Detention of Delhi Protesters

In an unusual special sitting on Sunday, October 11, the Supreme Court stepped into the standoff between protesters and the authorities in Delhi, directing that no peaceful, unarmed person be detained except by the procedure established by law. A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana also said Delhi Metro and railway services should run on their normal schedule and that internet access in the capital should not be disrupted.

The order came after a weekend in which thousands of people gathered to demand action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and in which petitioners told the court that Metro stations stayed shut and people were picked up far from the protest site despite an earlier order of October 9.

Why the court sat on a Sunday

The bench was hearing a contempt petition filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, which alleged that Metro station closures and train restrictions continued even after the court's October 9 order in the M.A. Baby case. The petition named Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and DMRC chairperson D Thara as alleged contemnors.

Alongside it, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing in person, pressed a habeas corpus petition over the detention of political leaders. Other pleas, including one by RJD MP Manoj Jha, were mentioned and the court said they would be tagged with the contempt matter.

What the Supreme Court directed

The bench issued a set of interim directions that apply across the capital:

1. No unlawful detention: Nobody is to be detained except as per procedure established by law, particularly peaceful and unarmed gatherings outside the area covered by prohibitory orders.
2. Section 163 board near the court: The prohibitory order notice put up near the Supreme Court is to be taken down if it has not already been removed, so that access to courts is not hindered.
3. Metro and trains: Metro and rail services must function normally, subject only to restrictions permitted under Article 19(2) for public order.
4. Free movement: People must be allowed to move freely through the city subject to traffic rules, and barricades are to be reviewed immediately.
5. Internet: Internet services are to remain undisturbed, though Justice Bagchi orally clarified that the court was not taking away the authorities' powers under the IT Act.
6. Professionals: Lawyers, journalists and others must not be stopped from doing their work.

The court issued notice to the alleged contemnors and asked them to file affidavits and compliance reports. According to LiveLaw's account of the hearing, the respondents have been asked to respond by Tuesday.

What the Centre told the court

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the authorities. He argued that the habeas corpus plea may not survive because those detained had already been released. He told the bench that Metro operations had not been reduced overall on October 10, with about 4,750 trains running as scheduled, and that entry and exit had been restricted at roughly 45 to 47 of Delhi's 303 Metro stations. He added that all stations had been open since the previous night and that internet services had been restored.

What the petitioners argued

The other side painted a very different picture. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Manoj Jha, said people were being taken off trains and detained well beyond the protest zone around Jantar Mantar. Menaka Guruswamy claimed that about 7,000 people had been detained, pointing out that the State had not shared any official figure, and asked for all prohibitory orders to be revoked.

Several lawyers raised the issue of access to justice. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan noted that Section 163 restrictions had been imposed right outside the Supreme Court, while others said practising advocates were unable to move around the city. Advocate Shadan Farasat told the court he had been assaulted after being picked up.

Key facts at a glance

Background: the protests over the Election Commission

The confrontation has been building for more than a week. Youth groups and opposition parties have been demanding the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, accusing the Election Commission of irregularities around voter rolls. A mass gathering called at Jantar Mantar on October 10 saw large-scale detentions, Metro curbs and train disruptions in central Delhi, and those detained reportedly included opposition leaders and YouTuber Dhruv Rathee. The authorities imposed restrictions under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the provision that replaced the old Section 144.

What it means for people in Delhi

For ordinary commuters, the immediate takeaway is that the court expects the Metro and trains to keep running on normal timetables, with closures allowed only where there is a genuine public order concern. For protesters, the order draws a clear line: peaceful assembly outside the prohibited zone cannot be met with detention outside legal procedure. The bench also signalled that it will examine how far the Police Act aligns with the right to free expression under Article 19.

What happens next

The Centre, Delhi Police and DMRC now have to file compliance reports explaining how they followed the October 9 and October 11 orders. Intervention applications will also be listed. With opposition parties holding their Chalo Delhi march on Monday, how strictly the authorities follow these directions will be closely watched, and the next hearing could decide whether the contempt proceedings go further.

Also Read

• Chalo Delhi March Today: CJI Declines Rahul Gandhi, Kharge Meeting
• Delhi CEC Protest: Hundreds Detained, Dhruv Rathee Held; Metro Shut
• Delhi Trains Cancelled Oct 10: NDLS, Nizamuddin Hit; Metro Curbs