New Delhi: The Supreme Court has clarified that its October 11 direction to authorities to take down a notice board imposing prohibitory orders under the BNSS in and around the apex court, was for the limited purpose of securing unhindered ingress to and egress from the court.
Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, deals with power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.
In an order passed November 3, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the October 11 direction did not stay, suspend or otherwise dilute any prohibitory order issued under section 163 of the BNSS.
It clarified that the authorities may issue such notice afresh in future, if the need arises, subject to conditions.
We have been informed that a notice board stating Section 163 BNSS has been invoked in and around the precincts of the Supreme Court has been put up in the court premises. We direct the authorities concerned to forthwith take down the said board, if not already done, so that there is no apprehension with regard to ingress and egress to the Supreme Court or any other court of law, the court had directed October 11.
November 3, the bench passed the order while hearing a batch of pleas on issues including alleged mass detention, restriction on protests, closure of metro stations and internet shutdown in connection with the protest proposed to be held at the Jantar Mantar October 10.
The said direction was issued for the limited purpose of securing unhindered ingress to and egress from this court and other courts of law, the bench said in its November 3 order.
It said the object of the October 11 direction was to ensure that access to justice was not impeded, and no advocate, litigant, or person visiting a lawyer for professional consultation was obstructed or deterred.
It did not stay, suspend or otherwise dilute any prohibitory order issued under Section 163 of the BNSS, the validity whereof is the subject matter of …. pending before us, it said.
It has been brought to our notice that the said direction is being misconstrued, and is being misused by certain elements, as though it had lifted the prohibitory order(s) in the Supreme Court premises, the bench said, while recalling that paragraph of the October 11 order.
It clarified that nothing contained in that paragraph shall preclude competent authority from displaying the notice afresh, subject to the condition that free movement of advocates, litigants and other persons having business before the top court, or any other court, was properly regulated and not obstructed in any manner.
October 11, the apex court had said people gathering peacefully should not be illegally detained and asked the Centre to ensure that the Delhi Metro functions normally and that there was no disruption to internet services, subject to law-and-order conditions.
It was then hearing a plea seeking contempt proceedings for an alleged violation of the top court’s direction to ensure that there was no complete prohibition on metro and train services in Delhi due to the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest.
The protest call was given by the CJP and some student organisations against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Election Commission.
