Plea in SC challenges Delhi Police decision to shift protests from Jantar Mantar

The petition questioned the suitability of the designated protest venues in the national capital, contending that the top court had earlier recognised Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site and rejected Ramlila Maidan as an unsuitable alternative.

It questioned the rationale behind the restrictions and the selection of new venues for demonstrations, alleging that some of the sites were located near Delhi’s landfill areas and were unsuitable for hosting public gatherings.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana on Tuesday sought the personal appearance of a senior Delhi Police officer to explain the alleged assault on women journalists during the anti-CEC protests in the national capital.

This came after senior advocate Indira Jaising mentioned a petition filed by the Network of Women in Media seeking safeguards for journalists, particularly women journalists, covering protests.

At least three other petitions relating to recent protests had also been filed in the top court.

The first petition was filed on behalf of the Lawyers’ Association for Constitution. It alleged that four of its members were manhandled and illegally detained by the Delhi Police during protests in the national capital on October 10 and 11, 2026.

The second petition, filed by the Free Speech Collective, sought binding guidelines to protect journalists from alleged unlawful detention, physical assault, intimidation and obstruction by the police while covering protests. It alleged that journalists continued to face police action even after the top court had directed the authorities not to interfere with their professional work.

The third petition, filed by some lawyers, challenged the gathering of a mob on the Supreme Court premises on Monday evening after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders marched to the top court’s Registry to file a petition against the Election Commission and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

Senior advocates Gaurav Bhatia and Mahesh Jethmalani mentioned the matter before a Bench led by the CJI, which agreed to take it up on Thursday.

Rahul Gandhi’s petition was not listed for hearing on Tuesday as the Registry had pointed out 14 defects in it.

CJI Kant assured the petitioners that all their matters would be listed for hearing on Thursday, subject to the rectification of the defects. “We will list all these matters. Make sure that the defects are cured,” the CJI told senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who represented one of the petitioners.