Internet shutdown during October 10 CJP protest was necessary: Centre to SC

Centre tells Supreme Court that the temporary suspension of mobile internet services around Raisina Hill during the October 10 CJP protest was a lawful and proportionate measure to maintain public order. It denied violating the court's directions and sought dismissal of contempt proceedings against the Union Home Secretary.

New Delhi:  The Central government has filed a counter-affidavit before the Supreme Court defending its decision to suspend mobile internet services in parts of central Delhi during the October 10 protest against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, organised by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), and denied that it had wilfully disobeyed the court’s directions.

In its affidavit, filed on Wednesday, the Centre maintained that the temporary suspension of internet services was necessary to prevent a disturbance of public order and constituted a proportionate response to the prevailing circumstances. It also urged the Supreme Court to discharge the contempt notice issued to Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan in connection with the restrictions imposed during the protest.

---

The Centre has further sought a modification of the Supreme Court’s order to permit the suspension of internet services in situations where such a measure becomes necessary, provided that the decision is taken in strict compliance with the law and the applicable statutory safeguards.

The dispute arose amid extensive security restrictions imposed across the national capital ahead of the October 10 demonstration called by the CJP. The party had planned to protest against the Election Commission of India (ECI) and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The Delhi Police had denied permission for the proposed gathering, citing the short notice given by the organisers.

On October 9, the Supreme Court intervened in the matter of restrictions placed on public transport ahead of the protest. The court directed the authorities to ensure that there was no complete prohibition on the movement of Delhi Metro trains and other trains entering the national capital, while allowing the regulation of services wherever necessary to maintain public order.

The Supreme Court also emphasised that security arrangements should not cause undue hardship to members of the public. It directed the authorities to ensure that decisions relating to the operation of transport services were communicated widely so that commuters could make the necessary arrangements.

Subsequently, a contempt petition was filed alleging non-compliance with the court’s directions.

During a special hearing on October 11, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Centre, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) chairperson D. Thara, seeking their responses to the allegations.

In its counter-affidavit, the Centre said the decision to suspend mobile internet services was taken following a request from the Delhi Police, which had apprehended a possible law-and-order situation during the proposed demonstration.

The Centre argued that the internet was suspended only from 10 p.m. on October 9 to 10 p.m. on October 10. The internet suspension was limited to a 4 km radius around Raisina Hill.

According to the government, the police had raised concerns about the potential consequences of the gathering, particularly after the organisers announced their intention to proceed despite being denied permission.

It maintained that the decision was not a wilful violation of the Supreme Court’s directions and sought relief from the contempt proceedings initiated against the Union Home Secretary.

The affidavit also referred to the Delhi Police’s experience during a similar episode on July 20, 2026, citing it as part of the justification for imposing preventive restrictions ahead of the October 10 protest.