SIR protest special hearing: SC directs Delhi barricades removed, internet restored

Barricades across Delhi must be removed and citizens allowed to move freely across the capital, subject strictly to public order considerations, the Supreme Court directed while hearing a batch of petitions challenging police action and restrictions during Saturday’s protests.

The Supreme Court is holding a special hearing today (October 11) to consider a contempt petition accusing key authorities of wilful disobedience regarding its October 9 directive against a complete shutdown of metro and train services in the national capital.

At least four petitions highlighted the alleged illegal detention of political leaders, lawyers, and members of the public, the alleged assault of advocates and journalists, internet blackouts, and the sudden closure of 45 Metro stations.

MUST READ | CJP protest: Abhijeet Dipke, Saurav Das & Ashutosh Ranka released by Executive Magistrate court

Directing that internet services be fully restored and ensuring that lawyers are not obstructed from discharging their professional duties, the bench accepted the government's assurance that Metro operations would remain normalized unless a fresh public order situation arose.

During the hearing, the court sharply questioned how prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) came to be imposed directly outside its own premises amid the CJP protest. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated he had no instructions on the matter, prompting the bench to direct him to obtain immediate details.

The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) president informed the court that lawyers were never notified about the restrictions, alleging that some advocates were picked up directly from their chambers. Responding to the submission, Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that if lawyers were not informed about the orders, that alone could be good grounds to quash them.

DON'T MISS | ‘Tired of going...’: Former Union minister Kapil Sibal says he 'lost trust' in Supreme Court

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan offered to show the court a photograph of a notice posted on Bhagwandas Road declaring Section 163 restrictions, while pointing out barricades blocking access outside both the Supreme Court and the High Court. SG Mehta noted he would need instructions regarding requests for unlisted mentioning.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for petitioners, pressed for an interim order directing incoming trains from originating stations to reach Delhi and opposed imposing Section 163 restrictions beyond a four-kilometre radius of Jantar Mantar.

Sibal sought assurances that peaceful protests would be permitted subject to public order, arguing under Article 19(1)(a) that while citizens have a constitutional right to protest peacefully, authorities were actively preventing protesters from reaching the designated site. Sibal argued that neither statutory law nor the Police Act could be used to curtail constitutional rights beyond what was strictly necessary to maintain public order.

SG Mehta responded that permission for the protest had not been sought.

Framing the core legal issue, Justice Bagchi noted that the bench wanted to examine how police restrictions interacted with constitutional protections under Article 19(2). Emphasizing that there was no dispute over the core right to protest, the judge remarked, "You cannot say my right to protest is beyond the Police Act," adding that the manner of exercising the right must comply with the law. Senior advocate Avi Singh separately told the court that no notification had been published under the Police Act declaring the protest unlawful.

DO CHECKOUT | Who is Ajinkya Shinde? All about CJP leader who is guiding the movement after Dipke's arrest

Addressing transport disruptions, the Supreme Court asked the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) to submit a map detailing station closures during the protests to ensure clarity on public accessibility. The bench observed that while 57 stations were initially proposed for closure, 45 were eventually shut, questioning how commuters could realistically navigate routes if middle stations were closed while those at either end remained open.

SG Mehta informed the bench that all Metro stations had reopened by 10 pm on Saturday and that internet services had already been restored. The bench said it would take the government's assurance on record while directing the Centre to file a response to all pending petitions. In the interim, the court ordered that Metro services must operate on their normal schedule, subject only to lawful public-order restrictions under Article 19(2).