SC directs normal Metro, rail services, uninterrupted internet in Delhi

The Supreme Court's intervention highlights the judiciary's role in scrutinizing executive actions that impact public access to essential services and information. Petitioners had alleged that restrictions on Metro and railway services, internet shutdowns, and widespread detentions on October 10 created a "curfew-like situation," potentially violating the court's earlier October 9 directive.

A key aspect of the ruling is the emphasis on protecting access to justice, with the court stating that lawyers must not be impeded in their professional duties. This suggests a recognition that broad public restrictions can inadvertently obstruct legal processes, thereby undermining the fundamental right to legal representation and access to the judicial system.

The court's request for affidavits from the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) and the Union government, seeking clarification on affected stations and advisories, indicates a judicial effort to assess the specifics of the implemented restrictions. This points to a detailed review of whether the measures taken were proportionate and consistent with prior court orders, rather than a blanket acceptance of security justifications.

While acknowledging the authorities' powers under the Information Technology Act, the Supreme Court's directive for internet services to remain undisturbed, unless for public order disturbances, reflects a cautious approach to digital shutdowns. This tension between state security concerns and public digital access is a recurring policy challenge in many Asian jurisdictions.