Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar has tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" to the Supreme Court in a contempt of court case against him over the curbs imposed during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest in Delhi on October 10.
In two affidavits filed before a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Kumar said that there had been "no non-compliance much less any wilful or deliberate non-compliance" with the Court's directions. He sought discharge of the contempt notice.
The contempt petition alleges that the Court's October 9 order was violated by closing entry and exit gates at metro stations, particularly GTB Nagar and Vishwavidyalaya. On October 9 and 11, the Court had directed that metro services run normally, internet facilities "function unhindered", barricades be reviewed and there be no illegal detention of peaceful assemblies outside Section 163 BNSS areas. It also ordered the removal of a Section 163 notice board at the Supreme Court.
In the compliance affidavit, Kumar said "internet facilities were working unhindered and only cellular internet services were suspended owing to the law and order situation." The counter affidavit adds that this was done at the police's request to the Central government, within four kilometres of Raisina Hill.
On metro services, the police said that 57 stations were regulated at first. After the October 9 order, this was scaled down to 45 of the network's 303 stations, "about 15% of the entire network." Normal services resumed at 10 pm on October 10.
The affidavit states that no notice warning against protests was affixed inside the precincts of the Supreme Court. It adds that the Court's premises "cannot be permitted to be used as protest site."
On detentions, the police said that people were removed under Section 65 of the Delhi Police Act and Section 172 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) only where Section 163 orders were in force. Those removed were kept in "makeshift centres", given "hot, fresh and good meals" and let go within two to six hours, it adds. Political leaders were seated in SHO chambers and offered "tea, coffee, meals and other refreshments," the Commissioner claimed.
The counter-affidavit further states that the CJP got permission for a one-day protest at Jantar Mantar on June 20 but continued it for 36 days. On July 20, it led a "Chalo Sansad" march without permission, drawing "well over 35,000" people, in excess of the 1,000 protestors agreed upon. The police claim over 240 personnel were injured.
It also cites Congress protests on October 6, 7 and 8, alleging that these were "fuelled by persons adorning cover of 'freelance journalism'."
The police treated CJP's October 7 letter as a mere "intimation" and rejected it on October 9. The same day, Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan wrote to all State and UT police chiefs. He cited "credible intelligence inputs" that CJP intended to "disobey statutory orders" and directed preventive measures.
Kumar called the affidavit an interim reply. He said that owing to "paucity of time", it did not address the other pending petitions. He said "an incorrect narrative is being sought to be propagated" about police action.