The Supreme Court has directed Delhi Police to remove barricades where they are not essential, after lawyers challenged restrictions imposed across the capital during protests by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP). The court also indicated that metro services, internet access and public movement should return to normal, subject to law-and-order requirements, according to a Live Hindustan report on October 11.
The intervention followed a hearing before a bench of Justices Joymallya Bagchi and V. Mohan on petitions related to police action during a protest held in Delhi on October 10. The proceedings included a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of court directions, as well as challenges to the detention of protesters and the imposition of Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the provision corresponding to the former Section 144.
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that people had allegedly been detained while travelling on trains and raised the issue of internet restrictions, referring to the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling in the Anuradha Bhasin case. Senior advocate Shadan Farasat questioned the alleged manner in which protesters were taken to buses. Senior advocate N. Hariharan said citizens’ right to move around the city had been taken away, the report said.
The court told Delhi Police that barricading could not be imposed across the city and said that barriers should be removed from places where they were not absolutely necessary. It also said that lawyers should be allowed to carry out their professional work. The court issued notice to the Delhi government in connection with the matter and indicated that an interim order would address metro operations, internet services and movement through the city.
The developments came as security remained tight around Jantar Mantar, Connaught Place and parts of Lutyens’ Delhi. Live Hindustan reported that protesters attempting to reach Jantar Mantar or Connaught Place in small groups were detained, while police and protesters clashed at some locations. Several people were detained near Connaught Place’s N Block, where security personnel restricted further movement.
The report also carried claims by CJP leaders that 30,000 to 40,000 security personnel had been deployed in Delhi and that restrictions had affected metro stations, railway services and shops. These claims were made by the protest organisers and were not independently established in the supplied material. Delhi Police, according to the report, registered more than 20 first information reports over alleged unauthorised demonstrations, obstruction of public servants, unlawful assembly, attacks or scuffles involving police personnel and damage to public property.
Three CJP leaders—Abhijeet Dipke, Ashutosh Ranka and Saurabh Das—were released by an executive magistrate court on personal bonds of Rs 50,000 each, with one surety. The report noted a difference between the lawyers’ account that no conditions were imposed and the police position that the bond was intended to ensure that the three maintained peace for one year.
The immediate administrative question is how Delhi authorities will balance crowd-control measures with uninterrupted access to transport, courts, workplaces and public streets. The next steps will depend on the Supreme Court’s interim directions and their implementation by the Delhi government, police, transport agencies and other authorities.
