The Supreme Court on Sunday issued a ruling placing authorities under an obligation to refrain from detaining peaceful gatherers without lawful cause, while also directing that Metro and railway networks continue operating without interruption. A government order followed within a day of authorities moving to disperse a Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) gathering at Jantar Mantar in Delhi.

The court issued a notice to the Centre in response to a contempt plea alleging that authorities had breached its earlier directives on transport restrictions during the protest. A bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, convened at a special sitting, noted that senior counsel had placed before it submissions of wide-ranging non-compliance: that Metro rail services had been suspended, that New Delhi and Nizamuddin railway stations had been kept shut, that no traffic advisories had been issued, and that a considerable number of people had been subjected to detention and harassment extending beyond the geographic limits covered by the prohibitory order under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The bench said those circumstances had prompted it to assemble for an urgent hearing in light of applications raising concerns about both the alleged non-compliance with its order of 9 October 2026 and the reported detention of a large number of individuals in Delhi on 10 October 2026.

Directions from the bench required Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to take steps ensuring Delhi Metro services ran on their usual timetable and that internet connectivity remained uninterrupted, with those obligations contingent on prevailing law and order conditions. The order further specified that lawyers, journalists, and those in comparable fields were to face no obstruction in carrying out their professional work.

Representing the central government, Mehta told the court that movement restrictions at Delhi Metro stations on 10 October were confined to 45 of the network's 303 stations, with passenger access limited at those locations alone.

A habeas corpus petition brought by advocate Menaka Guruswamy, challenging the detention of various political leaders, was among the matters before the bench at that sitting. The bench committed to hearings for all lawyers with a stake in the matter.

Three respondents are identified in the contempt petition lodged by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi: Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chairperson D Thara. A separate petition, challenging the closure of 57 Metro stations and the halting of train services into Delhi ahead of the planned protest, draws on a Supreme Court order of 9 October handed down while those proceedings were still active.

Filings before the court contended that both the detentions and movement restrictions imposed on 10 October ran contrary to directions the court had previously issued. The judicial intervention followed after the CJP, together with student organisations, called for a gathering at Jantar Mantar to press for accountability from Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over reported irregularities in the functioning of the Election Commission.

A large-scale police and security presence across the capital prevented the planned protest from proceeding. Among those taken into custody — a tally exceeding 7,000 people — were Abhijit Dipke of the CJP, a number of opposition figures, and YouTuber Dhruv Rathee.