The Supreme Court has questioned the blanket restrictions on Metro and railway services in Delhi over a proposed protest at Jantar Mantar, observing that the orders appeared to be “overreaching” because they imposed a complete ban on essential public transport.
The court said the authorities must distinguish between a total “prohibition” and the “regulation” of train services, making it clear that public transport should be allowed to operate under appropriate restrictions rather than being shut down altogether.
A bench comprising the Chief Justice of India, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana passed the order on October 9, 2026, in writ petitions filed by M.A. Baby and connected matters against the Union of India and others.
The issue came before the court after senior advocates, including Kapil Sibal and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Hariharan N, C.U. Singh, Ms Vrinda Grover, Mr. Prashant Bhushan, drew its attention to communications issued by the Delhi Police and railway authorities concerning the proposed protest.
The bench examined two communications dated October 8 issued by the office of the Joint Commissioner of Police, Transport Range, New Delhi, to the Managing Director of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), as well as another communication dated October 9, apparently issued to all zonal railways.
It also took note of an order dated August 23, issued by an Assistant Commissioner of Police purportedly under Section 70 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, and Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
The restrictions were imposed in view of the apprehension that unruly crowds might move towards sensitive locations.
As mentioned in the order, Metro services and all Mail and Express trains arriving at New Delhi Railway Station and Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station had been directed to stop operating or be cancelled.
The frequency of Metro trains passing through 57 stations was also reduced, with entry and exit gates scheduled to close at 9 pm on October 9 and remain closed on October 10 until the situation returned to normal.
Since the restrictions referred to the proposed protest at Jantar Mantar, the bench gave the organisers liberty to file urgent petitions and indicated that it was prepared to hear them at 2 pm or thereafter.
However, the senior counsel who raised objections to the suspension of transport services clarified that they did not represent the proposed protesters or the organisers.
The court noted that no petition had been filed on their behalf.
Read also: Allahabad High Court Crosses Milestone of 1 Lakh Judgments Translated Into Hindi
The bench then considered whether the complete prohibition on Metro movement and train services from the two railway stations warranted reconsideration.
After the court pointed out the difference between banning services and regulating their movement, the Solicitor General of India agreed to impress upon the authorities the need to review the restrictions.
Recording this assurance, the court said Metro trains and other railway services would be permitted to operate in a regulated manner, without causing inconvenience to Delhi residents and the general public.
The arrangement, it added, must conform to the principle of proportionality.
The bench clarified that “there shall be no outright prohibition on the movement of Metro trains”, while leaving room for the authorities to decide how services could operate safely and appropriately.
The court also emphasised that the revised arrangements must be communicated to the public.
It said the decision on regulated train operations should be widely publicised to avoid further inconvenience.
A traffic advisory on the smooth movement of vehicles in Delhi was also directed to be published in newspapers and on online platforms.
The court said the order should be issued the same day to ensure that commuters had clarity about the prevailing situation.
The hearing also brought up the need to provide basic facilities for people participating in peaceful and lawful protests.
The bench recorded that the lawyers were in agreement that it was “high time basic amenities were provided to those engaged in peaceful and lawful protest.”
It said suitable alternative sites should be identified and designated to accommodate the necessary infrastructure.
The competent authority was asked to consider the suggestion and take an appropriate decision.
The court directed the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, the concerned railway authorities and Delhi Police (Traffic) to submit a compliance report within four days.
The directions seek to ensure that transport services are regulated rather than completely prohibited, while commuters are kept informed and the authorities consider facilities for peaceful protesters.
Case: M A Baby vs Union of India & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 63560/2026 (Connected with Writ Petition (Criminal) Diary No(s). 63544/2026)
Date of Order: 09.10.2026
Status: Pending
