Delhi Police Defends October 10 Crackdown in Supreme Court

Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar has defended the preventive measures and detentions carried out on October 10 in the Supreme Court, stating that action was necessary to protect public order in a sensitive area. The police chief filed an affidavit before a Bench consisting of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. Several petitions had challenged the police crackdown on protestors who were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

Actions and Detentions

Mr. Kumar stated that individuals detained during the October 10 protests were kept in makeshift centres for two to six hours rather than jails, and were provided hot, fresh meals. Political leaders who were removed from the area were requested to sit in Station House Officer chambers and received refreshments while maintaining office dignity. The police chief added that only cellular internet services were suspended within a four-kilometre radius of Raisina Hill, rather than total internet access across the board. The Delhi Metro Rail Corporation also clarified that only 45 out of 303 metro stations were closed, terming it a regulation to comply with a Supreme Court order.

Security Context

The police chief justified the crackdown by pointing to recent events, including an unlawful assembly and violent march to Parliament on July 20 by the Cockroach Janta Party, which resulted in injuries and property damage. He also noted that protests called by the Congress party on October 6, 7, and 8 had choked central Delhi with traffic, caused harassment to police officers, and stranded citizens. Mr. Kumar highlighted that central Delhi houses 195 vital institutions, including the Supreme Court, Rashtrapati Bhavan, and foreign embassies, alongside hosting high-profile diplomatic visits and international summits between August and October 2026. Legal justifications cited in the affidavit included Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Section 65 of the Delhi Police Act, and Section 172 of the BNSS, alongside a communication issued by the Central government on October 9.

Context

Preventive detentions and the temporary suspension of specific communication services are legal powers sometimes exercised by law enforcement authorities in India during major security alerts or high-risk public demonstrations. The Supreme Court regularly examines petitions concerning civil liberties and police actions during public protests to balance freedom of assembly with the maintenance of public order and safety in national capitals.