Supreme Court Notices Issued For Delhi CJP Protest: The Supreme Court heard on October 11 the contempt petitions related to the CJP Protest held in Delhi on October 10. Four petitions related to CJP Protest were filed in the Supreme Court. In these, questions have been raised on the detention of political leaders and lawyers, police action, closure of metro and roads and use of phone jammers. All these petitions were heard in the court. After the hearing, the Supreme Court ordered removal of barricades from entire Delhi, restoration of internet and metro stations. Meanwhile, the country's top court, the Supreme Court, issued a show cause notice to the Home Ministry, Delhi Metro, Indian Railways and the police. This notice was issued to all of them for violation of its order of October 9.
A special bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana issued show cause notices to the Central Government (Home Ministry), Delhi Police, Railways and DMRC. He has been asked why contempt action should not be initiated against him. The court has asked the officials to file an affidavit and respond. The next hearing in the case will be on October 13.
During the hearing, the lawyers alleged that the police detained many people during the demonstration. Some lawyers were also beaten up. The issue of stopping metro services, blocking internet and disrupting the movement of people was also raised. The Supreme Court made it clear that no one can be detained except for action as per law. He directed to keep metro and rail services normal, not disrupt internet facilities and review barricades in the city.
Notice issued to concerned officials of Home Ministry
The Supreme Court issued notices to the concerned officials of the Home Ministry on allegations of not following its order. The court asked why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him. The officials will have to file an affidavit in this regard. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to issuing the notice. On this, Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that show cause notice and contempt notice are different.
Questions regarding ban on 45 metro stations
The issue of ban on metro stations also came up during the hearing. The Solicitor General said that out of 303 stations of Delhi Metro, entry and exit were limited at 45. He said that the rest of the stations were open and metro services ran as per normal timetable. 7,981 train trips operated. Justice Bagchi asked for the map of those stations from Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC). The court asked that earlier there was talk of closing 57 stations, then why ban was imposed on only 45 stations. The court wants to understand which stations were closed and which were kept open. Supreme Court issues contempt notice to Delhi Police, DMRC and Railways on contempt petition filed regarding CJP protest.
Instructions not to shut down internet and restore traffic
Supreme Court directed not to disrupt internet services in Delhi. The Solicitor General said that the Internet can be banned if required by law. On this, Justice Bagchi clarified that the option of taking necessary action under the provisions of the law is always open. The country's top court said that internet services should remain uninterrupted and any restriction should be imposed only as per the law. The court also directed to restore the movement of people and traffic in the city.
Supreme Court's instructions to the central government
1- Metro and rail facilities will run normally, unless there is a need to implement any rule in view of disturbance to public order under Article 19(2).
2- There will be no restrictions on the movement of people in the city under traffic rules. The decision to install barricades will be reviewed immediately considering the law and order and traffic situation.
3- Internet facilities will continue to operate without any interruption.
4- The movement of people in the city will continue smoothly as per the law.
5- No one will be detained without due process of law, especially outside areas where there is a peaceful and unarmed assembly of people and where Section 163 of the BNSS is not applicable.
Split in Election Commission on SIR! 14 times in 10 months, two election commissioners expressed displeasure over the decisions, accused of taking decisions without information
Follow the LALLURAM.COM MP channel on WhatsApp