The Central Government has submitted a formal affidavit to the Supreme Court of India, providing a detailed explanation regarding the various restrictions imposed during the protests held in Delhi on October 10. In its submission, the government categorically denied allegations of intentionally disregarding the court's previous directives. The government clarified that the decision to suspend internet services and implement other restrictive measures was taken following a specific request from the Delhi Police. This action was deemed necessary to maintain public law and order and to prevent any potential disturbances or untoward incidents during the demonstration. Despite defending the necessity of these actions, the government has tendered an unconditional apology to the Supreme Court for the situation.
Affidavit Filed by Union Home Secretary
The explanation was presented through an affidavit filed by Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan. This legal response comes in the wake of a contempt petition filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, while the petitioner had alleged that the closure of metro station gates during the protest constituted a direct violation of the Supreme Court's standing orders. In response, the government has urged the court to dismiss the allegations of deliberate defiance. Plus, the Centre has requested a modification of the court's earlier orders to ensure that administrative flexibility remains available for maintaining security in the future.
Scope and Duration of Restrictions
The restrictions in question were implemented within a 4 kilometer radius of Raisina Hill. These measures were in effect for a 24 hour period, starting from 10 PM on the night of October 9 and lasting until 10 PM on the night of October 10. The petitioner, Shailendra Mani Tripathi, specifically highlighted the closure of gates at the GTB Nagar and Vishwavidyalaya metro stations. He argued that these closures were a breach of the Supreme Court's order issued on October 9, which was intended to regulate the imposition of restrictions prior to the scheduled protests.
Police Commissioner's Response
In addition to the Home Secretary's submission, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar also filed an affidavit. The Commissioner denied any allegations of contempt or a willful refusal to follow judicial orders. The police department maintained that the steps taken were essential for the preservation of public order. According to the affidavit, the measures were timely and remained within the legal framework governing such situations. Like the Central Government, the Police Commissioner also offered a full and unconditional apology to the Supreme Court to address any concerns regarding the perceived violation of the court's authority.
Supreme Court's Previous Directives
The legal friction stems from a significant order passed by the Supreme Court on October 9 regarding the management of protests in the national capital. The court had explicitly stated that metro services and trains shouldn't be completely shut down under the pretext of maintaining law and order. The bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Judge V. Mohana, had observed that an entire city can't be brought to a standstill to manage a single protest. Following the reported violations of this order, the bench had issued notices to the Home Secretary, the Delhi Police Commissioner, and the Chairman of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), while the government is now seeking a revision of this October 9 order to allow for the suspension of internet services in specific circumstances when deemed absolutely necessary for security.