The Delhi High Court on Monday declined to urgently hear a petition challenging the closure of Jantar Mantar as a designated protest site, deferring the matter to Tuesday and noting that the Supreme Court is already examining the issue. A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma also listed for Tuesday a separate petition alleging that “outsiders” had infiltrated recent protests and assaulted demonstrators.

The refusal to grant an urgent hearing came during a mention by a lawyer who argued that peaceful protests were being “quelled” because authorities had not earmarked any alternative venue after Jantar Mantar was shut down. “Now today Jantar Mantar is also closed. There is no other place which has been earmarked by the executive to actually carry out a protest in accordance with law,” the counsel submitted, warning that the situation risked becoming a “black day” reminiscent of the 1975 Emergency.

The bench, however, pointed to parallel proceedings in the Supreme Court. “Tomorrow. The Supreme Court is equally seized of the matter. Not only that, but the Supreme Court has called on the Union to file their affidavits also. Once the Supreme Court is seized of it, we have to see—to what extent we can look at it again. That’s why let us have it tomorrow,” Justice Sambre responded.

Court Cites Supreme Court Proceedings

The High Court’s decision to postpone the hearing reflects the overlapping jurisdiction between the two fora on the question of protest rights in Delhi. In the Supreme Court earlier on Monday, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned a plea concerning the anti-SIR (Special Intensive Revision) protests, highlighting that prohibitory orders under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) had not been made public and that “senior advocates are being dragged through streets.” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant listed that matter for Tuesday as well, observing that democratic activities must proceed smoothly but should not obstruct the top court’s functioning.

The High Court bench’s deferral is significant because it effectively allows the Supreme Court to take the lead on framing the legal framework for protest restrictions, including the closure of Jantar Mantar. The High Court’s intervention, when it does hear the pleas, will likely be tailored to complement the apex court’s directions.

Protesters Allege Assault by Outsiders

Alongside the main petition, the court agreed to hear a separate plea filed by National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) president Vinod Jakhar. The plea seeks a “fair, independent and time-bound probe” into a series of assaults allegedly committed in broad daylight on October 10 at Connaught Place and roads adjoining Jantar Mantar. According to the petition, groups of men in civilian clothes surrounded and manhandled persons heading to the protest, as well as passers-by.

The plea provides graphic details from video recordings: a man held in a neck-lock, a youth thrown to the ground and dragged, a long-haired youth struck on the head, and a man whose shirt was torn off in a crowd. In each incident, the petition claims, “it is women bystanders and reporters” who stepped in to protect the victims, not any person in authority. The plea demands preservation of CCTV footage, an SIT probe, and an inquiry into the police response.

Background of the CEC Protest

The protests that triggered the legal challenges were called by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Hundreds took to the streets on October 10 and 11, leading to heavy police deployment and the closure of Jantar Mantar—a historic protest site in central Delhi. Opposition leaders, student groups, and even lawyers from the High Court and Supreme Court were among those detained.

Another bench of the Delhi High Court has already granted the Centre a day’s time to take instructions on a separate petition by Indian Youth Congress president Uday Bhanu Chib challenging the denial of permission to protest at Jantar Mantar. The multiplicity of petitions indicates the high legal stakes surrounding the right to peaceful assembly in the national capital.

The two pleas now scheduled for Tuesday—one directly challenging the closure of Jantar Mantar and the other seeking accountability for alleged violence—will come up before the division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sambre and Justice Sharma. The court’s ability to balance executive decisions on public order with constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly will be closely watched by the legal community.