The Supreme Court will hold a special sitting on Sunday, October 11, to hear a contempt petition alleging that authorities violated its October 9 order by continuing to close Delhi Metro stations and cancel train services during protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
According to LiveLaw.in, a special bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana will hear the matters. The contempt petition has been filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi.
Habeas corpus plea on detention of protesters
The special bench will also hear a habeas corpus petition on the detention of protesters during Saturday’s demonstrations in Delhi. According to a Bar and Bench report, the petition was filed by Trinamool Congress MP and senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy. It challenges the preventive detention of Opposition leaders, including four former Chief Ministers.
Guruswamy has argued that preventive detention cannot be used to suppress the fundamental right to peaceful protest. She has also questioned the police action of picking up protesters from the streets and Opposition leaders from their residences.
Contempt plea names three senior officials
Tripathi’s plea seeks contempt proceedings against Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) Chairperson D Thara for allegedly wilfully disobeying the court’s directions.
Tripathi has argued that the authorities continued to impose restrictions on public transport even though the Supreme Court had directed them to ensure that Metro and railway services were not completely suspended during the October 10 protests.
According to his petition, the continued closure of Metro stations and cancellation of trains caused significant inconvenience to commuters and severely disrupted public life in the national capital. The court is yet to adjudicate on these allegations.
The petitioner has also contended that the restrictions continued despite the court’s clarification that public transport should operate in a regulated manner and not be completely prohibited. The plea argues that the measures caused unnecessary hardship to Delhi residents and affected their ability to travel across the city.
What the Supreme Court said on October 9
The contempt petition stems from the Supreme Court’s October 9 order in M A Baby v. Union of India. The case dealt with restrictions on public transport ahead of the planned protests by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and Opposition parties against CEC Gyanesh Kumar.
During the hearing, the court examined communications issued by Delhi Police directing the closure of 57 Metro stations and restrictions on Mail and Express trains arriving at New Delhi and Hazrat Nizamuddin railway stations. The DMRC eventually reduced the closures to 45 Metro stations.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, questioned the restrictions. It observed that the notifications appeared to be “overreaching” because they imposed a complete ban on essential public transportation.
The court clarified that there should be no outright prohibition on Metro train movements. It said authorities could regulate Metro and other railway services appropriately, keeping in mind security concerns and the principle of proportionality.
The bench also stressed that transport arrangements should be publicised to avoid inconvenience to commuters. It directed the authorities to issue traffic advisories and consider suitable alternative locations, equipped with basic amenities, for peaceful protests.
The Supreme Court’s special sitting on Sunday will consider the contempt petition and the allegations of non-compliance with its earlier directions. The court’s consideration of the matter will determine the next steps in the proceedings.