Supreme Court bans illegal detention, as lawyers cite Emergency

A day after mass detentions and a civil rights curfew called by senior lawyers compared to the 1975 state of emergency, the Supreme Court convened what it called an “extraordinary, extraordinary” hearing on Sunday to order the Union government and the Delhi Police to stop the illegal detentions and allow free and smooth movement of people and traffic, as well as the operation of metro and rail services, but by “subordinating metro and rail services”.

Special Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued notices to Union Home Minister Govinda Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) Chairman D. Thara on a petition filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi seeking “complete action” against them for allegedly violating any traffic ban on October 9, which banned Metro services. 10.

The court ordered the police to immediately review the placement of barricades on public roads, ensure that internet connectivity is not disrupted, and lift the bans issued under Section 163 of the BNSS at the Supreme Court and other courts in and around the capital to facilitate litigants’ access to lawyers and justice.

The court did not explicitly comment on the legality of the prohibitory orders.

Justice Bagchi, who dictated the order, noted that no arrests would be made outside the four-kilometer no-go zone in central Delhi, which includes Jantar Mantar, a site designated for protests, except by law. The court said people should be allowed to assemble peacefully outside the restricted zone. All people, including journalists and lawyers, must be allowed to carry out their professional duties, the court ordered.

Also Read: Anti-CEC Protest LIVE Updates

The court’s repeated emphasis on the “subject to law and order” rule signaled a deliberate balancing act of enforcing constitutional protections against unlawful detention and ensuring the right to free movement, access to courts, and Internet connectivity while preserving the state’s authority to enforce reasonable restrictions to maintain public order.

Crowded courtroom

The morning began with the bench changing courtrooms at the last minute, before 10:30 a.m., due to overcrowding. The video conference link was down due to a “glitch” and was later found to be blocking viewers. The escalation of negotiations was punctuated by verbal confrontations over the seating arrangements for senior police officers present in the courtroom. One of the lawyers, who was detained on October 10, urged his colleagues to offer seats to the female police officers, saying: “They are our guests”.

The session finally started with the entrance of the two judges. Justice Bagchi, who headed the Bench, responded to the vote of thanks from Advocate General Kapil Sibal by assuring that the judiciary is at the service of the nation. He expressed grave concern over the “flagrant offences” committed by the police and security personnel on 10 October.

Lawyers described a state crackdown that affected thousands of people, from young students and seniors to professionals, journalists and activists. The detainees were taken in police vehicles to prearranged centers in an operation to prevent them from gathering and demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The protests were sparked by the deletion of millions of registered voters across the country during a particularly intensive revision of electoral rolls.

“Yesterday we were one step away from a police state. Protect the right of citizens to peacefully protest in the capital,” senior lawyer Shadan Farasat, who was dragged into a police van on October 10 and detained for hours, told the court.

Senior advocate and personal petitioner Menaka Guruswamy asked the government how many people were detained on October 10.

“It’s not just that free movement wasn’t allowed; it’s not just that opposition leaders were picked up from their homes; it’s not just that protesters were thrown into vans and taken away by police officers without badges… It’s that young people went out to protest peacefully because they think the electoral system is not free and fair. It’s an undeclared state of emergency. Did the citizen come? it was suspended 50 years ago during the state of emergency article 19 If yes, it is done only during emergency,” Ms. Guruswamy said.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said Emergency has reached our doorstep. “As we speak, there is a no ban sign posted outside this court,” he said. The court ordered its immediate removal.

Senior advocate KK Venugopal narrated how a junior colleague was detained by a police team right outside the High Court and taken 11 km away for no apparent reason.

Defense of the government

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Union Government and Delhi Police along with Additional Solicitor General SV Raju admitted that the protesters were removed at 2:00 PM and released at 6:00 PM on 10 October. “The question of the legality of the arrest is for your Lordships to decide. I will have to file a response to the petitions filed in court,” he said.

At the behest of the government, he claimed that there had been “zero reduction in the total volume of metro traffic”. “Out of 303 stations in Delhi Metro, entry and exit were restricted to 45 stations on October 10. If one station was closed, the neighboring ones were also opened. Today, all stations are open. Internet was restored last night,” he said to loud roars from the courtroom.

“We want to be clear on this point in the affidavit. We would like you to give us the location of these closed metro stations. Were the metro stations at both ends of Delhi open while the ones in the middle were closed?” Judge Bagchi asked.

There was loud booing in the courtroom as the lawyer argued that the job of lawyers is in courtrooms and not protesting in the streets.

The court said the authorities must specify in their affidavits whether they have complied with the October 9 court order to issue notices to transport and railway services.

On the claim that policemen were also injured on October 10, Justice Bagchi said the court was agnostic about the identity of the injured but would still look into the complaints.

“Please reply by Tuesday (October 13) along with compliance,” Justice Bagchi directed the authorities.

The hearing ended with Justice Mohana personally appealing to the petitioners’ side that “all those protesting in the public interest, please take peaceful means”.

Published – 11 October 2026 17:30 IST