The Supreme Court has heard a plea against reported train cancellations and Metro closures in Delhi ahead of the October 10 protest and will take up the matter again at 2 PM, with the Bench saying it must also hear the other side.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday heard a plea against reported cancellation of trains to Delhi, closure of Metro stations and other restrictions in the capital ahead of the October 10 protest announced against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and will hear the matter again at 2 PM [Plea Against Restrictions In Delhi Ahead Of October 10 Protest Matter].
The Bench was headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and included Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The matters are untested: the restrictions are described as reported, and the response of the Union Government and the Delhi Police has not been recorded in the proceedings reported so far. The Court expressed no view on the merits.
Sibal: Trains Cancelled, Metro Stations Closed
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the Court that all trains were cancelled and Metro stations closed, and described the planned protest as peaceful. He said trains to New Delhi and Nizamuddin had been cancelled between 4 AM and 2 PM on the day of the protest, including the Howrah, Shalimar and Rajdhani Express services. Placing a compilation before the Court, he referred to reports of 23,000 security personnel, deployment of Central Armed Police Forces, 10 detention centres being prepared and checks at Delhi’s borders. He further submitted that restrictions on app-based services, internet curbs and action against YouTubers were reportedly on the cards, and that mobile journalists had been asked to carry identity cards.
When Mr Sibal said, “What is happening to my country?”, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta responded, “It is our country.” Mr Sibal replied, “When I say my country, I mean yours too.”
Bhushan, Sankaranarayanan On Preventive Measures
Advocate Prashant Bhushan said the whole of Delhi had been shut down and alleged that people were being threatened, including at places of worship. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said 57 Metro stations had been closed, affecting about 18 million people across the NCR, and argued that the measures were preventive and disproportionate.
“A peaceful protest is not unlawful. There is no question of shutting down an entire city because we are incapable of handling some protesters. These are preventive measures. Nothing has happened yet.”
Another Senior Advocate alleged that police were going from home to home and from paying guest accommodation to paying guest accommodation threatening landlords, and said this was on record. These allegations have not been tested and no response was reported.
CJI: Why Not Delhi High Court?
The CJI observed, “There was nothing like this when we came in the morning,” and asked why the petitioners had not gone to the Delhi High Court. Mr Sibal said a petition had also been filed there and that the High Court would hear it on Monday, adding: “What message comes from this Court today is different from the message from the High Courts.” He urged the Court to hear the plea along with Items 38 and 39, and the CJI said it would be listed along with them.
Bagchi: Right To Associate Must Follow The Law
“There is no doubt about the fundamental right to association. But that right has to be exercised in accordance with the laws governing association. You have to make an application for permission. If they do not grant permission or drag their feet, you come to Court.”
Mr Sankaranarayanan responded that this would take time since the protest was the next day. Justice Bagchi said the Court must first understand the ground reality and that people are never told they have no right to protest, but that they do so at the risk of prosecution if the protest is not in accordance with law. Mr Sankaranarayanan submitted that a protest is lawful even without permission and that he could be prosecuted only for something unlawful. The Bench agreed that there is a right to protest.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Plea Challenges Appointment Of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, Sukhbir Sandhu And Vivek Joshi
Bench Suggests Targeted Response, Asks For Organisers
Justice Bagchi suggested a more targeted approach, saying that if the organisers were known, the Court could ask how many people they expect and then “call upon the State to calibrate its response, rather than taking broad-spectrum measures.” The Bench asked whether the petitioner was an organiser. Mr Sibal said a Member of Parliament, Mr Baby, was filing a petition, and Mr Bhushan said the protests are being organised by a wide number of organisations. Mr Sibal added that permission has not been granted, that the Indian Youth Congress had also applied without being granted permission, and that the Delhi High Court had been approached.
The Bench asked for the order showing whether permission had been granted. Mr Sibal said permission had not been granted and that the refusal was “in the news”, adding that authorities “will not give us the order of refusal.” On the transport curbs, Mr Sankaranarayanan argued that the cancellation of all trains into Delhi had to go. The Bench said it would not be fair because the other side was not being heard.
The Bench also said it was surprised as nothing was before it yet. Counsel said a petition was being mentioned and that they were “terrified”. The Bench said that if a petition is filed in the High Court, it was willing to pass an order requesting the High Court to take it up immediately. Mr Sibal sought leave to mention the matter again at 2 PM with a representative of the protest organisers.
Case Details: Plea against train cancellations, Metro closures and other restrictions in Delhi ahead of the October 10, 2026 protest, Supreme Court of India, hearing of 9 October 2026, to be taken up again at 2 PM. Case number and petitioners’ names not reported; no order reported yet.
Appearances: Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the petitioners; Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was also present.