In the Supreme Court, a bench of Justice Joymala Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana began proceedings to hear the contempt petition related to the closure of 45 metro stations and the habeas corpus petition filed in the matter of the detained people. The bench heard both these cases. The court’s intervention has been sought in relation to the detained people through a habeas corpus petition. At the same time, a contempt petition related to the closure of 45 metro stations was also heard.
Internet service should be restored
The Supreme Court has issued a contempt notice to Delhi Police. The court also directed that movement and internet service should be normalized in Delhi. The Supreme Court said that people should not be stopped from doing work related to their profession. Regarding the restrictions imposed in Delhi, the Supreme Court told the Solicitor General (SG) appearing on behalf of the Central Government that people should not face any problem in doing work related to their profession. The Supreme Court said that the metro should be run as per the normal timetable.
Barricades installed at various places should be removed
However, considering the law and order situation, rules can be imposed if necessary. The court has also mentioned Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The court asked to restore normal internet service in the city. Also directed that Barricades installed at various places in Delhi should be removed. Barricades should be placed only where they are needed. The Supreme Court also said that the movement of people should be normalized. However, appropriate restrictions can be imposed as per need to maintain law and order. Now the hearing of this case will be held on Tuesday.
SC’s important comment on the action of Delhi Police
Commenting on the Delhi Police, the court said that in the name of maintaining law and order, the police does not get any independent right to present its stand apart from the arguments of the state. If a police officer has suffered personal harm, he can approach the court separately. It does not matter to the court who the victim is? It is the equal responsibility of the court to protect the rights and freedoms of the citizens. Be it a policeman, a lawyer or a common citizen, it is the equal duty of the court to protect the rights of every person.
Supreme Court said…
- The issue is to what extent the restrictions imposed by the police fall within the ambit of Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
- You have the right to protest, there is no dispute on this. But the process of protest should be within the ambit of the Police Act.
- You cannot say that your right to protest is above the Police Act.
Justice Mohana – If you are concerned about public interest then you should promise that you will protest peacefully and not take provocation.
Judge – The board under Section 163 should be removed from outside the court.
At the same time, at the beginning of the hearing of this entire case, Justice Bagchi said that we are sitting here in an extraordinary situation. We have 2 petitions before us, but we know that many lawyers want to speak. We will give opportunity to everyone. KK Venugopal is seen connected online. We will hear them first.
Venugopal said that I am appearing in case no. On this the judge said that you are demanding contempt. There are more such petitions. We propose that they be heard on Monday. Before the notice, we will hear the Solicitor General.
During the hearing, lawyer Kapil Sibal said that there are other things besides contempt.
Judge – Habeas Corpus? (habeas corpus)
Sibal – Yes. There is also a matter of imposition of Section 163.
Judge – It was installed within a radius of 4 kilometers?
Sibal – Yes. Internet was also banned. This also comes under the ambit of the ‘Anuradha Bhasin’ decision.
(Bhasin’s old order was regarding internet ban)
Sibal – Apart from Maneka Guruswamy, there is also a petition by Manoj Jha.
Shadan Farasat – I was thrown into a moving bus. It is not my matter, but yesterday we were just one step away from becoming a police state. My request is that the rights of citizens should be protected.
N Hariharan – Yesterday lawyers were also stopped outside the Supreme Court.
Kapil Sibal thanked the court that you came for hearing at this hour.
Supreme Court- We are always present to serve the country.
Sibal said that even after the order of the Supreme Court, 45 metro stations were kept closed. Internet remained closed within a radius of 4 km. This is your contempt.
Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the petitioner, said that a complete police state-like situation had arisen, whoever was seen was being caught by the police. On behalf of the petitioner, it was demanded that the barricades should be completely removed in Delhi. All train and metro routes should be made smooth.
The court was informed about the police not wearing the name plate/badge. The petitioner asked the court to issue instructions on this. On behalf of the petitioners, it was said that the lawyers were not being allowed to meet their clients in the police station. The police were threatening the lawyers themselves to file an FIR.
On behalf of the Lawyers Foundation, the lawyer said that the situation was the same as it was yesterday. It is not possible to describe them.
Judge – No orders will be given on the petitions which are not listed but are only being mentioned. Will hear the listed cases. Later these will also be tagged with him.
Gopal – Section 163 was imposed outside the court also. Apart from this, people were detained at various places. There are videos of this.
Judge – You are George on merit. You have to understand that we are sitting on Sunday as an exception
Gopal – Yes. My first request is that instructions should be given for free movement in Delhi, barricades should be removed.
Gopal – Second request, policemen without badges should be identified and action should be taken.
Sanjay Hegde – It is wrong to stop lawyers from working. Solicitor General should ensure that this does not happen to lawyers. Yesterday, a lawyer who had gone to meet a client was beaten up at Sanjay Colony police station.
Judge – we will consider.
Another lawyer – The lawyers were detained from the chamber.
Justice Bagchi reprimanded a lawyer who was trying to speak out of turn.
A lawyer said – The lawyer’s place is in the court. If lawyers come out on the streets, they will not get special treatment.
Many lawyers raised slogans of shame and shame
The judges expressed strong displeasure over this behaviour. Some senior lawyers apologized on behalf of the remaining lawyers.
Advocate – We started a peaceful march. We were taken into custody.
Senior lawyer Rakesh Khanna – Ordinary people who came to Delhi from outside were also caught. Excessive measures were taken to prevent people from going to the protest site.
Food- About 7000 people were detained. There were also 3 former Chief Ministers
Justice Bagchi said that all of you should not worry, on the issue of life and liberty of the people, we will go to the bottom of this matter and will give orders after hearing the entire matter.
Justice Bagchi said that we will hear the listed cases and will not hear the mentioning application or give orders.
Guruswamy said that encroaching on people’s right to peaceful protest is an undeclared emergency. Arbitrary steps were taken by the government and whatever came to mind was done.
On behalf of the petitioners, lawyer Maneka Guruswamy said that more than 7000 people, student leaders and journalists were detained. 4 former Chief Ministers, don’t know how many people…the exact number was not disclosed by the police. This is like an undeclared emergency. We are standing in front of you again after 50 years with emergency like situations.
Maneka – Such a situation has come before the court after 50 years. This situation had arisen earlier when Emergency was imposed.
Senior Advocate Arundhati Katju – It was difficult to come to court yesterday. Online filing was difficult.
Judge – And lawyers have also addressed us on this.
Taking a jibe at the petitioners’ argument, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi Police, said that I have not come prepared with any speech. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta is arguing in the court.
Maneka – Do not allow the police to violate your orders.
Solicitor General – Our detailed response is not ready yet, but around 2 pm some people were detained. He was released at 6 o’clock. In such a situation the Habeas Petition no longer stands.
Solicitor – As far as contempt is concerned, we want to state that there was no unnecessary restriction. Metro trains are running fully.
Solicitor – Entry-exit was stopped in 45 stations out of 303.
SG Tushar Mehta, on behalf of Delhi Police, said that out of 303 total metro stations, only 45 metro stations were closed.
Supreme Court- Earlier you had talked about closing 57 stations, in the talk you closed 45, then tell us how you decided that only these 45 stations have to be closed.
Tushar Mehta- All stations have been fully opened since 10 pm last night.
Judge – Senior lawyer Maneka Guruswamy said that other stations including GTB Nagar and University stations were closed for people. His argument was that this was against our orders.
Judge – He also said that not only famous personalities but other people were also detained. About 7000 were detained.
Judge – In response, the Solicitor General said that he did not have the copy of the unlisted case. He presented his stand on 2 listed petitions. Denied the views of the petitioners. He said that the metro was running normally. Entry-exit was stopped at only 45 out of 303 stations. All stations have opened since 10 pm last night.
Also read:
Abhijeet Dipke, Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka preventive arrest, Delhi Police presented in court.
SK Sharma is a content writer who writes on news, entertainment, and lifestyle topics. She has over four years of experience and is known for conveying information in simple and clear language.
