CJP protest: SC orders normal Delhi Metro services, internet restoration

The Supreme Court on Sunday directed authorities to ensure that Delhi Metro services operate normally, internet services are restored and people gathering peacefully are not illegally detained amid protests organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and student organisations in the national capital.

A special bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notice to the Centre on a contempt petition alleging that authorities had violated the court’s October 9, 2026, order concerning restrictions on Metro and train services during the protests.

The demonstrations have been called by the CJP and student organisations demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Election Commission (EC), particularly the revision of voter lists.

The bench convened an urgent hearing on Sunday after receiving applications alleging violations of its earlier directions and the illegal detention of people in Delhi on October 10.

CJP protest: Detentions, Delhi traffic jams; Supreme Court contempt plea filed

“In view of the urgent applications alleging violation of our earlier order dt. October 9, 2026, and also alleging illegal detention of large number of individuals at Delhi on October 10, 2026 this court had assembled for an urgent hearing.”

The bench also recorded allegations that Metro services had been disrupted, New Delhi and Nizamuddin railway stations had remained closed, traffic advisories had not been issued and people had been detained beyond the area covered by prohibitory orders.

“Senior counsels submitted there was a flagrant violation of the directions — metro railway was not functioning, New Delhi and Nizamuddin railway stations remained closed, no traffic advisories were issued and a large number of persons were subjected to undue harassment and illegal detention even beyond the area which was covered by the prohibitory order under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023,” the bench said.

The Supreme Court directed the authorities concerned to remove any boards or notices announcing the imposition of Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) around its premises, if they had not already been taken down. It said the move was necessary to ensure that people had no apprehension about access to justice, including entry to and exit from the Supreme Court and other courts.

The bench also asked Mehta to ensure that lawyers, journalists and others were not prevented from performing their professional duties.

During the hearing, Mehta submitted that entry and exit were restricted at only 45 of the Delhi Metro network’s 303 stations on October 10. His quoted statement, however, referred to 47 stations being closed or restricted.

“Trains were inducted as per standard schedule. A full complement of 4750 trains are run on 10th Oct as per schedule on internet. Delhi Metro – there are 303 stations, 47 were closed/restricted,” Mehta said.

Justice Bagchi asked about advisories issued by the railway authorities and directed the government to file its response and details of compliance by Tuesday.

“Are advisories by railway authorities? Please file your response to these petitions and compliance by Tuesday. In the meantime, the metro functioning should continue in accordance with the normal schedule (subject to a public order condition envisaged under Art.19(2)). No advocate should in any way be hindered in discharging their professional duties. we are consciously saying ‘professional’. Internet facility to city has to be restored.”

The bench directed the authorities to review all barricading across Delhi, saying it would remain a neutral arbiter while fulfilling its constitutional duty to protect fundamental rights under Article 32.

It said further reports would emerge about the incident, but allegations of violations of statutory duties, excessive force, illegal detentions and the involvement of a police officer without a badge required a response from the authorities. The matters have been listed for further hearing on Tuesday, October 13.

The Supreme Court was hearing the contempt petition filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi against Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chairperson D Thara.

Delhi shuts 57 metro Stations, suspends mobile internet ahead of protest

The petition referred to the court’s October 9 order, passed while hearing a separate plea challenging the closure of 57 Metro stations and cancellation of trains to Delhi in view of the protest.

The bench was also hearing a habeas petition filed by senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy concerning the detention of political leaders.

CJP leaders released after preventive arrest

CJP leaders Abhijeet Dipke, Ashutosh Ranka and Saurav Das were released on Sunday after being placed under preventive arrest following their detention at Delhi airport on Saturday.

Police said Sections 126, concerning security for keeping peace, and 170, concerning arrest to prevent the commission of cognisable offences, of the BNSS were invoked against the three leaders after their flight landed in the national capital.

In a post on X, Delhi Police said: “Preventive arrest u/s 126/170 BNSS of Sh. Abhijeet Dipke, Sh. Ashutosh Ranka and Sh. Saurav Das was done on 10.10.2026. All due legal procedures were followed and they were produced before the SEM Court, Delhi Cantt on 11.10.2026.”

The three were produced before the executive magistrate’s court at Delhi Cantonment on Sunday and released after furnishing a surety bond of Rs 50,000 for maintaining peace and good behaviour for one year, according to the details provided.

CJP legal affairs head Ratna Singh confirmed their release on X, posting: “Executive Magistrate court releases Abhijeet, Saurav and Ashutosh.”

The CJP said the leaders had been released on the condition that they would maintain public peace. Singh said they would not be allowed to “breach peace” for a year.

“Cockroaches never die,” the group posted on its X account shortly after Dipke’s release.

The detentions took place amid a major security clampdown in Delhi on Saturday, when more than 7,000 protesters were detained at multiple locations, preventing demonstrators from reaching Jantar Mantar for the planned gathering.

Several opposition leaders, including former chief ministers Arvind Kejriwal, Mamata Banerjee, Pinarayi Vijayan and Manik Sarkar, were also detained while attempting to join the protest.

YouTuber and social media influencer Dhruv Rathee, who was among those detained, was released shortly after midnight.

“I ‌was not arrested ⁠or detained, I was KIDNAPPED,” Rathee, who has more than 33 million YouTube subscribers, said in a post on X.

The CJP had renewed its call for a protest at Jantar Mantar on Sunday. More than 30,000 police and paramilitary personnel were to be deployed across the city as authorities continued security arrangements.

By noon on Sunday, protests had been subdued, with a few dozen people from student organisations chanting slogans against Kumar. Police detained some of them.

Metro stations had reopened and mobile internet services were back up after restrictions imposed by authorities to prevent Saturday’s demonstrations.

With access to Jantar Mantar blocked on the first day of protests, Neha Bora emerged as a new face of the demonstrations, urging people to regroup at Dilli Haat, a crafts market 10km away.

Bora, the national president of the left-wing All India Students’ Association, was among more than 2,000 activists detained on Saturday. Police said most of them were released late that night.

Lawyers protesting outside the Supreme Court were briefly detained on Saturday, along with several reporters, including a Reuters journalist.

Opposition parties and critics of the government criticised what they described as the excessive use of force against protesters. A UN body called on the authorities to ensure that the right to peaceful assembly was respected and fulfilled.

India’s foreign ministry described the UN statement as “an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of India.”

Abhita Ruheja, a protester detained on Sunday, criticised the security restrictions.

“Is this how a democracy works? They have been scrapping rights after rights and this is turning into ​a dictatorship,” she said.

Voter list revision at centre of protests

The youth movement has emerged as one of the biggest political challenges to Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his 12 years in power. Protesters are demanding Kumar’s resignation over a revision of voter lists that critics allege disproportionately benefits Modi.

Protests have taken place in different parts of India since The Indian Express reported in late September that two of Kumar’s deputies had raised concerns internally about voter list revisions, registration procedures and digital systems.

The Election Commission has said differing views are normal during internal deliberations and denied favouring any political party.

Data cited by the CJP from the Election Commission showed that about 130 million names had been deleted from electoral rolls during the verification exercise. Of these, 63 million people had relocated and 30 million could not be traced.

Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has accused groups opposing it of trying to undermine India’s democracy by questioning legitimate electoral processes. The BJP and the Election Commission have denied allegations of manipulation.

Opposition parties, meanwhile, have alleged that Muslim voters and other minorities, who are less likely to support the Hindu nationalist ruling party, have been disproportionately affected by the deletions.

The government had thwarted the planned mass mobilisation at Jantar Mantar on Saturday through extensive security arrangements and the detention of thousands of demonstrators, including CJP leaders, opposition politicians and Rathee.

The Supreme Court will take up the petitions again on Tuesday, October 13, when the authorities are expected to submit their responses on compliance with the court’s earlier directions and the allegations raised over the handling of the protests.

(With inputs from agencies)