We have won first two polls in Modi 2.0: Amit Shah

The Supreme Court heard petitions concerning the alleged illegal detention of journalists during recent protests in the national capital. During the proceedings, the Centre submitted that distinguishing accredited journalists from content creators and reel makers has become difficult, noting that anyone with a mobile phone or a microphone can record and upload material. Delhi Police filed a counter-affidavit stating that demonstrations between 6th and 10th October were aggressive and fuelled by individuals claiming cover as freelance journalists. The top court also discussed forming a committee to examine the detention incidents, seeking proposed names in a sealed cover.

The Supreme Court of India has directed law enforcement agencies and private parties to preserve all CCTV footage and digital video evidence related to recent protests, allegations of illegal detentions, and police excesses. Hearing multiple petitions, the top court is examining police actions, excessive shutdowns, and the issuance of prohibitory orders under Section 163 across the national capital. The court also issued notice on pleas challenging police detention powers under Section 172 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Senior advocates raised concerns over curbs extending beyond notified zones, detention figures, and the alleged assault on women journalists and lawyers, prompting calls for an inquiry committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge. Meanwhile, the Solicitor General and affidavits from the Ministry of Home Affairs and Delhi Police highlighted concerns over crowds being provoked under the guise of freelance journalism. The top court also addressed the denotification of protest sites, with hearings on the matter continuing.

The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the de-notification of Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site, examining whether the Centre arrived at the decision with proper application of mind. The government defended the move by submitting that a panel had examined the issue, whilst petitioners argued that alternative sites such as Burari, Ramleela, and CBD grounds are distant, expensive, and have limited availability. The court issued notice to the Centre and the Delhi administration, asking why the stir site was shifted. Alongside this challenge, the bench addressed connected petitions regarding alleged illegal detentions, directing the preservation of CCTV footage and ordering the Home Ministry and Delhi Police to place Section 163 prohibitory orders on record. Notice was also issued over allegations of violence against women journalists and lawyers, with the bench agreeing to consider suggestions for an inquiry committee.

The Supreme Court has pulled up Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi over his conduct during an October 12 march toward the court premises. The court expressed displeasure over crowd entry into the premises and directed Gandhi to explain his conduct and intentions while filing a petition. Meanwhile, the bench issued notice on petitions challenging the SIR process and the functioning of the Election Commission. Taking note of allegations of police force and protestor conduct, the top court also directed all law enforcement agencies and petitioners to preserve CCTV and digital footage gathered during the events.