Supreme Court holds special Sunday hearing on contempt plea against Delhi Police chief

The Supreme Court convened a special Sunday sitting to hear contempt petitions against Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Chairperson D. Thara over sweeping transit shutdowns and police action during demonstrations in the capital.

A special Bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana assembled at 10:30 am on 11 October to hear the urgent challenges, following massive disruptions across Delhi during protests demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

What prompted the Supreme Court contempt plea

The contempt action, filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, argues that authorities deliberately ignored orders issued by the court on 9 October. A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant had instructed officials not to impose blanket bans on public transport and insisted that any security measures must remain proportionate.

Despite an assurance given to the court by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that transit restrictions would be reassessed, transport authorities shut entry and exit gates across numerous stations. The petition states that gates at 45 stations were closed, while transport announcements indicated curbs affecting up to 57 stations, alongside the cancellation of more than 200 trains bound for the capital.

Tripathi stated in his petition that he personally visited the GTB Nagar and Vishwavidyalaya Metro stations on the night of 9 October and found their gates locked, recording video evidence. When he visited the protest hub at Jantar Mantar an hour earlier, only police and paramilitary personnel were present, with no demonstrator crowds visible. The plea argued that authorities failed to publish transparent traffic advisories, stranding essential travellers and crippling daily movement across the National Capital Territory.

Allegations of excessive force and detentions

Alongside transport disruptions, the court agreed to examine allegations of heavy-handed policing during the Cockroach Janta Party demonstrations on 10 October.

A separate petition lodged against the Delhi Police Commissioner contends that security personnel unleashed indiscriminate violence on unarmed demonstrators at Jantar Mantar. The filing alleges that officers operated without name tags, assaulted peaceful participants, and that male officers manhandled several female protesters in breach of established restraint guidelines.

Simultaneously, Senior Advocate and Trinamool Congress MP Menaka Guruswamy moved the court against sweeping preventive detentions. Her petition challenges the detention of opposition leaders—including four former chief ministers—alongside advocates, among them Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat. Guruswamy argued that preventive detention cannot lawfully serve as an instrument to suppress the fundamental right to peaceful assembly.

What the court previously ordered

The legal clash stems directly from the top court's hearing on Friday, 9 October. Reviewing earlier transit bans, the Bench warned law enforcement against overreach, remarking that managing potential crowds did not permit authorities to "use a hammer to kill a fly".

The court directed the government to shift from total prohibition to regulated transport operations, ordering the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, railway officials, and Delhi Traffic Police to submit formal compliance reports within four days. Delhi Police had refused permission for the demonstrations, invoking prohibitory restrictions under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

The special weekend sitting will assess whether the administrative shutdown and police measures amounted to wilful disobedience of those judicial directions.