The Delhi High Court has sought the Centre’s and other authorities’ responses to several petitions arising from protests in the Capital over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, including claims of assault, detention, traffic disruption and business losses around central Delhi.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma on Tuesday asked counsel appearing for the Centre and other authorities to obtain instructions from their respective departments. The court also sought records of pleadings and submissions made by the petitioners and the government before the Supreme Court, which is separately dealing with petitions related to the protests.
One petition, filed by NSUI president Vinod Jakhar, seeks the court’s intervention and an independent inquiry into allegations that “anti-social elements” assaulted people on October 10 at Connaught Place and near Jantar Mantar. The Centre questioned whether the petition could be entertained because Jakhar’s affiliation to NSUI had not been disclosed in the petition, according to the report. Jakhar told the court that he had filed it in his personal capacity and asked authorities to preserve CCTV footage. The court granted the Centre three weeks to file preliminary objections but did not issue an interim direction on the CCTV request.
Another petition by law student Anshika Tripathi and a practising advocate challenges restrictions imposed before and during the protests. The petitioners argued that denial of permission to hold a demonstration at a particular venue should be considered separately from restrictions on people travelling to Delhi or assembling elsewhere in the city. They also raised concerns about alleged house arrests and illegal detention and asked the state to disclose on oath how many people were being held and under what orders. The court did not issue a direction on that request at this stage.
The proceedings also brought the operational impact of demonstrations on central Delhi’s road network into focus. Advocate Rishabh Saxena alleged that the absence, or inadequate implementation, of a coordinated traffic-management mechanism for public assemblies in areas including Mandi House and Jantar Mantar had delayed his journey from Defence Colony to a court premises by two hours. His petition objected to a gathering at the Mandi House junction on Monday when INDIA bloc leaders travelled to the Supreme Court.
Petitions by a street vendors’ association and a traders’ association, which had not been formally notified and listed when the matter was heard, raised concerns over the effect of protests near Jantar Mantar on markets and commercial activity. Senior advocates representing the associations argued that roads were being blocked and markets shut, particularly during the festival season. They claimed that businesses had suffered losses of more than Rs 2,000 crore and sought implementation of Supreme Court orders and the standard operating procedure for conducting protests.
The petitions also refer to Jantar Mantar’s status as a protest location. The lawyers said the site had been denotified as a designated protest venue and argued that the authorities should implement the applicable directions rather than allow gatherings to disrupt surrounding streets and commercial areas. The Delhi High Court division bench is scheduled to take up the petitions again on Friday, while the Supreme Court has deferred the hearing of its related pleas that were listed on Tuesday.
