Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal said on Saturday that he had lost trust in the Supreme Court of India after months of courtroom battles over alleged voter-list irregularities — and the court responded the next day by saying it was determined to restore his faith. The rare exchange unfolded as a Supreme Court bench heard a special Sunday application concerning the police curbs that had surrounded a Jantar Mantar protest in Delhi.

The bench directed the removal of barricades across the capital, the restoration of normal metro services and internet connectivity, and said lawyers must be allowed to discharge their professional duties without obstruction. The order came after Sibal, who had challenged the curbs in an urgent mention on Friday, publicly questioned why the restrictions were imposed and whether the court would deliver any meaningful relief.

A Rare Public Break With the Court

At a press conference on October 10, Sibal was asked whether he was dissatisfied with the Chief Justice of India. He avoided a direct answer, saying lawyers were not in the business of registering satisfaction or dissatisfaction with judges. Instead, he said, a lawyer has to fight people's cases and file petitions when injustice occurs, whether or not the court hears them.

But on the institution as a whole, Sibal was far more direct. "I am tired of keeping on going to the Supreme Court. I am speaking for myself. I don't think there is any use of going there. I don't have much hope in the Supreme Court of India ," he said.

Voter Deletions and the SIR Process

Sibal's frustration was grounded in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, a process that has become a major flashpoint. Lawyers and civil society groups have alleged that the names of eligible voters were removed arbitrarily while ineligible names were added. "We told the Supreme Court many times that the voters' names are being wrongly deleted and wrongly included; we argued for months. The evidence is before the public," Sibal said.

He pointed to tribunal decisions in West Bengal, where appellate tribunals had restored voters' names in 93 per cent of the appeals decided so far. That statistic, he argued, was proof that most deletions were wrongful. If the tribunals could see it, he said, the Supreme Court must also have known — yet no interim relief was granted. The court has previously declined to suspend Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and has sought the Election Commission's response.

Across the country, more than 13 crore voters are said to be affected by the ongoing revision process, making the issue a high-stakes electoral controversy.

Peaceful Protest or Public Order Threat?

Sibal's Saturday remarks coincided with a planned protest by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) at Jantar Mantar. The group has been demanding Kumar's resignation over alleged electoral irregularities. Although the protest had been announced days in advance, authorities imposed prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, initially shut 57 metro stations, suspended internet services, cancelled train arrivals and restricted hotel bookings. Police sources indicated around 1,000 people were detained while trying to reach the protest venue, including CJP leaders who had travelled from Mumbai.

Sibal questioned the scale and legality of the response. A peaceful, pre-announced protest, he argued, did not threaten society. The administration, he suggested, was protecting itself rather than public order . He also asked how long authorities could keep rounding people up and transporting them away from the city. "The entire city cannot be barricaded," he said.

He recounted an incident in which three lawyers connected with the protest were intercepted on their way to the Supreme Court by two vehicles, with one person allegedly claiming to be from the Intelligence Bureau. An application seeking an FIR was moved before a magistrate; the matter was contested on territorial jurisdiction and the order was reserved.

Supreme Court's Extraordinary Sunday Intervention

On Friday, Sibal had made an urgent mention on behalf of CPI(M) general secretary M.A. Baby, challenging the restrictions. The court reduced the number of closed metro stations from 57 to 45 but left train restrictions in place. After Sibal's press conference, the court convened the special Sunday hearing and went considerably further. It directed the removal of barricades, restoration of metro and internet services, and said lawyers must be able to work without obstruction.

The bench also addressed Sibal's comments directly, observing: "We are here to RESTORE the faith of Mr Sibal in this institution... whose confidence has been one of the surest weapons in our arsenal." The remark underlined how seriously the court viewed a senior lawyer's loss of confidence in the judicial process.

Sibal had ended his press conference with a warning that he would continue filing petitions even if the court chose not to hear them, while also acknowledging that the Supreme Court remained the institution best placed to save the Constitution. The immediate result of Sunday's hearing is that movement, transport and communications in Delhi are to be normalised. The larger controversy over SIR-related voter deletions, the CEC's role and the adequacy of judicial remedies remains pending before the Election Commission and the Supreme Court, with no final resolution yet.