New Delhi, Oct 9 (KNS): The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to reconsider blanket restrictions on Delhi Metro and railway services ahead of the Cockroach Janata Party's (CJP) proposed October 10 protest at Jantar Mantar, observing that public transport could not be completely shut down at the cost of public convenience.

According to a report by India TV, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed concern over the reported closure of 57 Metro stations and restrictions on train services, saying such measures could cause serious inconvenience to millions of commuters dependent on public transport for their daily activities.

The court observed that while security considerations were important, restrictions should be proportionate to the prevailing situation and should not unnecessarily disrupt essential transport services.

"Closing facilities such as Metro stations will cause inconvenience to millions of people. We have to look into this," the bench observed, according to the report.

The observations came ahead of the CJP's proposed demonstration at Jantar Mantar, demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations of "vote theft".

The Delhi Police had reportedly denied permission for the protest, citing short notice.

During the hearing, the bench highlighted the difficulties likely to be faced by commuters travelling from Gurugram, east Delhi, south Delhi and other parts of the National Capital Region for work and other essential purposes.

The Chief Justice noted that while some lawyers travelled in private vehicles, a large number of court employees and ordinary citizens depended on Metro services.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi also expressed concern over restrictions on Metro, railway and road transport, observing that essential services should continue through regulated arrangements rather than being subjected to complete shutdowns.

"We have noted the points regarding the metro and trains. Road transport arrangements must also be in place; these services cannot be completely shut down," Justice Bagchi observed.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, submitted that complete restrictions were sometimes necessary to maintain law and order.

However, the bench maintained that restrictions should be imposed according to the situation and that a blanket prohibition would not be appropriate.

Mehta assured the court that he would discuss the matter with the government and concerned authorities to explore measures for minimising inconvenience to the public.

Defending the security arrangements, the Solicitor General referred to an earlier protest on June 20, saying demonstrators had initially obtained permission for one day but continued their sit-in for 17 days.

He alleged that protesters had subsequently attempted to march towards Parliament, resulting in clashes in which more than 200 police personnel were injured.

Mehta also alleged that women police personnel had been molested during the confrontation and maintained that the restrictions were necessary to prevent a recurrence of such incidents.Click Here To Follow Our WhatsApp Channel

He disputed suggestions that the entire national capital had been brought to a standstill, saying internet restrictions had been imposed only in specific areas.

The Supreme Court, however, emphasised that security measures must be balanced against the rights and convenience of ordinary citizens.

The Chief Justice also questioned the suitability of Jantar Mantar as a venue for large demonstrations, observing that its geographical location and limited space posed logistical challenges.

"In our view, there is an issue regarding the geographical location of the protest site (Jantar Mantar). The space is also small; an alternative location should be considered," the court observed.

The bench said inadequate space could create difficulties in providing food, sanitation and emergency medical access, potentially affecting the fundamental rights of protesters.

It suggested that authorities consider identifying an alternative venue capable of accommodating large gatherings while ensuring public safety and minimising disruption.

The court further stressed the need for timely public advisories informing commuters about barricades, traffic diversions, alternative routes and the availability of transport services.

According to the India TV report, the bench was informed that restrictions had also affected train services from New Delhi and Hazrat Nizamuddin railway stations.

Orders relating to Metro and railway restrictions, including an August order issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), were placed before the court.

The bench clarified that it was not examining the merits of the proposed protest as none of its organisers had appeared before it.

Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing in her capacity as a citizen, raised concerns over reports that people were being warned against participating in the demonstration.

The court said its immediate concern was the inconvenience caused to the general public and the need to ensure that essential services remained operational.

It asked the Centre to reconsider the proposed shutdown of Metro stations and railway services and explore controlled arrangements that would address security concerns without causing widespread hardship.

The bench also took up the report of a high-powered committee constituted to examine issues arising from the July protests.

The court was informed that the committee had commenced its work but required certain facilities to carry out its responsibilities.

It directed the government to extend necessary cooperation to the committee.

The Supreme Court reiterated that public convenience must remain a key consideration while implementing security arrangements and that transport services should continue in a regulated manner wherever possible. (KNS)