The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the restrictions imposed in Delhi ahead of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protest. The petitions have challenged the measures taken by the authorities to prevent the demonstration, including the imposition of Section 163 and restrictions on internet access. The hearing is taking place amid a heavy presence of lawyers in the courtroom, with several senior advocates seeking to present their submissions before the court.
Justice Bagchi noted that the matter was being heard under extraordinary circumstances and said the court would give all lawyers an opportunity to be heard. He said two petitions were currently before the court, but several other lawyers also wanted to make submissions.
Senior advocate K K Venugopal appeared to be joining the proceedings online and was invited to speak first. When the court pointed out that Venugopal was seeking contempt proceedings and that similar petitions had also been filed, it proposed hearing those matters on Monday. The judge said the court would hear the Solicitor General before issuing notice.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal subsequently told the court that the petitions raised issues beyond contempt. When the judge asked whether the matter also involved habeas corpus, Sibal agreed and highlighted the imposition of Section 163.
The court asked whether the provision had been imposed within a four-kilometre radius. Sibal confirmed this and also raised the issue of internet restrictions, arguing that it fell within the scope of the Supreme Court’s Anuradha Bhasin judgment, which dealt with restrictions on internet access.
Sibal further said that, apart from the petition filed by Menaka Guruswamy, another petition had been filed by Manoj Jha.
Senior advocate Shadan Farasat also addressed the court, saying he had been thrown out of a moving bus. He said the issue was not about him personally but about protecting citizens’ rights.
“Yesterday we were just one step away from becoming a police state,” Farasat said, urging the court to ensure that citizens’ rights were protected.
Senior advocate N Hariharan also told the court that lawyers had been stopped outside the Supreme Court on Thursday.
Farasat had been detained amid the restrictions surrounding the proposed protest, and a video purportedly showing the incident had gone viral on social media.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: abplive.com
