New Delhi, Oct. 11: The Supreme Court on Sunday issued notice to the BJP-led Delhi government seeking its reply on why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against it over the closure of Metro stations during the October 10 protests demanding the ouster of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
A special bench comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana directed the authorities to file a short affidavit responding to the contempt petition and submit a compliance report on implementation of the court’s earlier directions, issued on October 9, concerning public transport and movement during the protests.
In a slew of directions, the court ordered that Metro and railway services should function normally, subject to regulatory measures necessitated by public-order considerations. It said movement across the city should not be obstructed except through traffic regulation, directed an immediate review of road barricades and ordered that internet services remain undisturbed, subject to statutory powers available to the authorities.
The bench further directed that there should be no unlawful detention and that peaceful assembly should be permitted outside areas where restrictions under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which replaced the erstwhile Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were in operation.
Justice Mohana also reminded those supporting the protests of their responsibility to ensure peaceful demonstrations. “All of you present here, if you are seriously interested in public welfare, please undertake that you will all protest peacefully and not instigate any other person,” she said.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan agreed, while seeking a corresponding assurance from the authorities. “Absolutely. And that undertaking should come from their side also about how to behave with peaceful protesters,” he said.
The court also ordered removal of a board outside the Supreme Court announcing imposition of Section 163 BNSS in the vicinity, observing that citizens and lawyers should not be impeded in accessing the court.
The directions came on petitions arising from restrictions and detentions during protests organised by the Committee for Judicial Accountability and Reforms and the Cockroach Janta Party seeking CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s removal over allegations concerning decisions taken during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy submitted that around 7,000 people, including opposition leaders and four former Chief Ministers, had been detained. She questioned how the right to peaceful protest could be curtailed without suspension of fundamental rights and contended that shutting Metro stations despite the court’s earlier direction amounted to contempt.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the right to protest could not be taken away, subject to reasonable restrictions relating to public order under Article 19, and maintained that citizens did not require prior permission merely to exercise that right.
Former Attorney General K.K. Venugopal drew attention to the detention of a former junior colleague, saying she had been taken away in a police vehicle and dropped about 11 kilometres away without being properly informed of the basis for the action.
Senior advocate Shadan Farasat, who said he too had been detained, urged the court to protect citizens’ right to protest. A woman lawyer also recounted being picked up with others while peacefully marching near the Supreme Court.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that most detainees had since been released. He said Metro train operations had not been curtailed, though 45 of 303 stations had been closed. The bench observed that closure of strategically located stations on particular routes could nevertheless substantially inconvenience commuters.
Mehta also informed the court that internet services had been restored and assured it that lawyers, journalists and others would not be obstructed in discharging their professional duties.
Pramod kumar is a Senior Journalist, Covering Supreem Court of India
