Supreme Court directs removal of BNSS notice from its premises

The case concerns a Contempt Petition and a Habeas Corpus Petition alleging violations of a previous Supreme Court order regarding Delhi protest curbs, specifically the closure of metro stations, internet shutdowns, and illegal detention of individuals. The Court addressed urgent applications regarding the restoration of essential services and the protection of professionals' rights to work.

Who it concerns: Petitioner: Shaileendra Mani Tripathi; Respondent: Govind Mohan; Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice V. Mohana.

What the court decided

• Allowed the application for permission to file the contempt petition.
• Found a prima facie case of violation of the order dated 09.10.2026.
• Issued notice to the alleged contemnors, directing them to file a counter affidavit and compliance report by 13.10.2026.
• Dispensed with the personal presence of the contemnors for the time being.
• Directed that metro trains and railway facilities function normally unless regulated under reasonable restrictions.
• Directed the review of road barricades to ensure free movement of people.
• Directed that internet facilities function unhindered.
• Directed that there be no illegal detention of peaceful unarmed assemblages beyond the area where Section 163 BNSS is in operation.
• Directed authorities to remove any notice board stating Section 163 BNSS has been invoked in and around the Supreme Court premises.
• Tagged other unlisted mentioned petitions and intervention applications with the present matters.

Also in the document

• The Court noted allegations that 45 out of 303 metro stations were closed and that the internet was shut down, though the Solicitor General assured the Court these had been restored.
• The Solicitor General assured the Court that lawyers, journalists, and other professionals would not be impeded in their professional duties.
• The Court directed the removal of a specific notice board regarding Section 163 BNSS from the Supreme Court premises to prevent apprehension regarding ingress and egress.