SC orders normal functioning of public transport, against illegal detention
Protests by CJP at Jantar Mantar
Shillong, Oct 11: The Supreme Court has sought the explanation of Delhi authorities as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for closure of metro stations on October 10 during the protests of Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).
A special hearing was held on Sunday ( Oct 11), by a division bench of justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
As the protests continued at Jantar Mantar for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar for the SIR discrepancies, the authorities closed 45 metro stations of Central Delhi.
The detention pf CJP leaders and opposition leaders coupled with the closure of metro stations prompted filing of many petitions before the Supreme Court.
The main petition was 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.
According to the petitioner, the closure of trasport facilities is against the Supreme Court’s order of October 9 that there should not be complete shutdown of public transport.
The specific orders of SC
Metro and rail facilities shall function normally, unless regulations are required to be imposed, keeping in mind disturbance to public order as envisaged under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
Free movement of people in the city shall be permitted, subject to traffic regulations. Smooth movement of people in the city shall not be hindered and shall be permitted in accordance with law.
Barricades imposed shall be reviewed. The requirement of imposition of barricades shall be reviewed forthwith, keeping in mind law and order and other traffic conditions.
Internet facilities shall remain undisturbed, as per law. When we are saying internet facilities shall remain undisturbed, we are not taking away the powers under the Information Technology Act.
There shall not be illegal detention, save and except by procedure established by law, particularly with regard to assemblage of people beyond the area within which it’s imposed.
Assembly shall be permitted in accordance with law, particularly in respect of peaceful assembly of people beyond the area where Section 163 BNSS is in operation, in accordance with law.
The court wanted the removal of a board placed outside the Supreme Court.
“We have been informed that a notice board stating imposition of Section 163 BNSS in and around the vicinity of the Supreme Court has been put up. We direct the authority concerned to take down this board, if not already done, so that citizens as well as lawyers can have access to justice,” the court said ( Courtesy : barandbench.com)
