In short: On Sunday, 11 October 2026, the Supreme Court said a prima facie case of contempt had been made out over alleged breach of its 9 October order on public transport curbs in Delhi. It issued notice to three senior officials and asked for counter-affidavits and a compliance report by 13 October. The Centre disputes the allegations, and no final finding has been made.

What happened?

A Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana held a special Sunday hearing on a contempt petition filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The petition names Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) Chairperson D Thara.

The Court said that, after considering the submissions and the petition, the petitioners had made out a prima facie case. It issued notice to the alleged contemnors. Their personal appearance has been dispensed with for now.

The background: the 9 October order

The protests on 10 October were called to demand the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. They come amid criticism of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls by the Election Commission of India.

On 9 October, the Court observed that notifications restricting public transport ahead of the protests appeared to be overreaching. It asked the authorities to:

  • reconsider the proposed closure of 57 Metro stations;
  • allow regulated train operations; and
  • publicise the revised decisions widely, so that commuters face minimum inconvenience.

The contempt petition, filed on 10 October, alleges that Metro stations stayed closed despite this order.

What does the Centre say?

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta disputed the allegations. He told the Court that:

  • Metro services operated normally, though 45 of 303 stations were closed to maintain law and order;
  • all stations had reopened by 10 PM on 10 October; and
  • internet connectivity had been restored.

Petitioners' counsel argued that Metro services were disrupted, railway stations stayed closed, traffic advisories were not issued and internet services were suspended.

What does "prima facie" mean here?

"Prima facie" means "at first look". The Court has not found anyone guilty of contempt. It has only found enough in the petition to ask the officials to respond. In its words, the authorities must show cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. Whether any breach occurred will be decided after the responses are heard.

Other directions reported

According to a report on the Court's order, it reiterated that public transport may be regulated where necessary, within the reasonable restrictions allowed by Article 19(2) of the Constitution, but should not be prohibited outright. It also reportedly directed that:

  • Metro and railway facilities operate normally, subject to such regulation;
  • Delhi authorities review road barricades, subject to law-and-order and traffic needs;
  • internet services work without hindrance in Delhi;
  • peaceful, unarmed gatherings should not face illegal detention beyond areas where Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is in force; and
  • lawyers, journalists and other professionals be allowed to work without obstruction.

The habeas corpus petition

The Court also issued notice in a separate habeas corpus petition. It alleges that thousands of protesters, including opposition leaders, were illegally detained. Reports put detentions at more than 7,000. Mr Mehta denied any illegal detention and argued the plea had become infructuous because the individuals had been released. Both matters, with connected petitions and intervention applications, will be heard on 13 October.

Who is affected, and what should you do?

Delhi commuters and residents are directly affected by transport and internet restrictions. Protesters and journalists are affected by the directions on detention and non-obstruction. Ordinary readers need not take any legal step. Follow official transport advisories, and watch for the outcome of the 13 October hearing, since the story is still developing.

Frequently asked questions

Has the Supreme Court held the officials guilty of contempt?

No. It has found a prima facie case and issued notice. The officials must file counter-affidavits and a compliance report by 13 October.

Do the officials have to appear in court?

Not for now. The Court has dispensed with their personal appearance for the time being.

Were all Metro stations closed?

The Solicitor General told the Court that 45 of 303 stations were closed for law and order, and all had reopened by 10 PM on 10 October. The petitioners dispute that the October 9 order was complied with.

Sources

Not legal advice. This page explains the law in general terms. Rules, fees and limits change, and your facts matter. Check the official source or consult a qualified advocate before acting. Disclaimer