The Supreme Court has directed Delhi authorities to restore normal movement, internet access and metro services in Delhi after protests on 10 October. The bench also ordered that barricades be removed wherever they are not required and that people should not be prevented from carrying out their professional work.
Justices Joymala Bagchi and V. Mohana heard a contempt petition linked to the closure of metro stations and a habeas corpus petition concerning people detained during the protests. The court issued a contempt notice to Delhi Police and said restrictions must be examined against constitutional protections.
Court orders normal services
The bench directed that metro trains should operate according to their normal timetable. It also said internet services should be restored normally and movement across the city should be allowed without unnecessary obstruction.
Barricades may remain only at locations where they are needed, the court said. It added that reasonable restrictions can still be imposed when required to maintain law and order. The bench referred to Article 19(2) while discussing the limits on restrictions.
The court also said people must be able to continue work connected with their professions. The direction followed arguments that lawyers, journalists and other people had faced difficulties during the restrictions.
The hearing will continue on Tuesday.
Dispute over metro closures and detentions
The proceedings followed claims that metro access had been blocked at 45 stations and that internet service had been stopped within a four-kilometre radius. Lawyers appearing for petitioners also alleged that people were detained at different locations and that lawyers were prevented from meeting clients at police stations.
Petitioners sought free movement in Delhi, removal of barricades, smooth operation of train and metro routes, and action to identify police personnel who were allegedly not wearing name plates or badges. Arguments also referred to the use of Section 163 in parts of the city.
Some lawyers told the court that people had been detained from offices, chambers and other places. Other submissions alleged that lawyers had been threatened with first information reports and that a lawyer visiting a client at Sanjay Colony police station had been beaten. These were arguments presented during the hearing, not findings by the court.
The hearing also became tense when some lawyers raised slogans. The judges expressed displeasure, and senior lawyers apologised on behalf of others. The bench said it would hear listed matters and would not pass orders on applications that were only being mentioned.
Delhi Police response
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi Police, said a detailed response was not yet ready. He argued that some people detained at about 2 PM had been released by 6 PM and said the habeas corpus petition therefore did not continue to apply to them.
Mehta also said the metro system had continued operating and that entry and exit had been stopped at 45 of the 303 stations. He told the court that all stations had been opened from 10 PM the previous night.
The bench questioned the basis for selecting those stations, noting that an earlier figure of 57 stations had been mentioned. The court also heard the petitioners' submission that stations including GTB Nagar and Vishwavidyalaya had been closed.
Rights and protest conditions
The court said the police do not receive unrestricted authority merely because they are responsible for maintaining law and order. It added that an officer who has suffered personal harm may approach the court separately.
The judges said the court's duty to protect rights and liberty does not depend on whether the affected person is a police officer, lawyer or ordinary citizen. They also said the central issue was how far the restrictions imposed by police came within Article 19(2).
The bench recognised the right to protest but said protests must follow the police law and procedures. Justice Mohana asked those concerned with public welfare to assure the court that demonstrations would remain peaceful and would not involve provocation.
Conclusion
The immediate directions require normal movement, internet access and metro operations, while allowing only necessary law-and-order restrictions. The Supreme Court will continue hearing the connected matters on Tuesday.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What did the Supreme Court direct Delhi authorities to do?
The court directed authorities to restore normal movement and internet services, operate metro trains on their usual schedule and remove unnecessary barricades.
Q. Can barricades remain in Delhi?
Yes. The court said barricades may remain where they are necessary for law and order.
Q. What petitions were heard?
The bench heard a contempt petition concerning metro station closures and a habeas corpus petition concerning detained people.
Q. What did Delhi Police say about the metro stations?
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said entry and exit had been stopped at 45 of the 303 stations and that all stations had opened from 10 PM the previous night.
Q. What did the court say about the right to protest?
The court said the right to protest exists, but demonstrations must follow police law and procedures.
Q. When will the matter be heard next?
The hearing is scheduled to continue on Tuesday.
