New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Sunday issued notices to Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) Chairperson D Thara over alleged non-compliance with its directions on public transport restrictions during the CJP protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
A Bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana held a rare Sunday hearing on a contempt petition alleging that authorities continued to keep several Delhi Metro stations closed despite the court’s October 9 directions against a complete shutdown of Metro and train services serving the national capital.
The Bench directed the alleged contemnors to file affidavits responding to the petition and submit a compliance report concerning the court’s earlier order. The matter will be taken up on Tuesday.
The notices do not amount to a finding of contempt. The allegations will be considered as the proceedings continue.
Why Did The Supreme Court Issue Contempt Notices?
The contempt petition was filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, who alleged that the authorities had continued restrictions on several Metro stations in violation of the Supreme Court’s October 9 directions.
The petitioner argued that the restrictions had severely disrupted public life and caused hardship to commuters across Delhi. He sought contempt proceedings against the three officials, alleging wilful disobedience of the court’s directions.
The Supreme Court has now sought their responses and a report detailing compliance with its earlier order.
What Did The Supreme Court Say About Delhi Metro And Trains?
On October 9, a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant directed the Centre to ensure that there was no “complete prohibition” on the movement of Metro services and trains arriving in Delhi.
The directions came amid restrictions imposed ahead of the CJP protest demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The court said the government could take appropriate decisions to regulate movement but should ensure that inconvenience to the public was minimised.
Its directions sought to balance security requirements during the protest with the need to keep public transport functioning.
What Did The Contempt Petition Allege?
Tripathi’s petition referred to the October 9 order, which followed concerns over the closure of 57 Delhi Metro stations and the cancellation of a large number of Delhi-bound trains ahead of the protest.
The petitioner alleged that continued Metro restrictions went against the court’s directions and disrupted commuters’ movement across the national capital.
The Supreme Court has asked the officials named in the petition to explain their position and provide a compliance report. Whether the restrictions violated the court’s order will be considered in the proceedings.
When Will The Supreme Court Hear The Matter Next?
The matter is scheduled to be heard on Tuesday, when the court will consider the responses and compliance report sought from the alleged contemnors.
The proceedings will focus on whether the authorities complied with the October 9 directions and whether further action is warranted in light of the allegations.
