Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal on Saturday questioned the legality of detaining people to restrict them from participating in the protest at Jantar Mantar demanding resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and alleged that several protesters were taken to undisclosed locations.
Addressing a press conference, Sibal questioned the imposition of prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), saying such restrictions were meant to prevent threats to public order and not to stop peaceful demonstrations.
"If a person or a community wants to protest peacefully, then who is in danger? The society is not in danger. It seems that the government is in danger," he argued.
Sibal questioned why people travelling to Delhi by train and air were being detained before reaching the protest venue, and cited several names of people he said had been held in Karnataka and West Bengal.
"If a youth gets on a train, will you arrest him? On what basis will you arrest him? What kind of law is this," he asked.
Sibal also questioned the practice of taking detainees to undisclosed locations without informing their families about their whereabouts.
"You formally arrest someone. Tell us where you are taking him," he said.
Referring to the security deployment in the capital, Sibal questioned the need for such a large force to deal with a peaceful demonstration.
"And you need 28 battalions for this? You need CAPF and Delhi Police for this? Thousands and thousands," he said.
Sibal alleged that protesters were being manhandled at places where they had been detained and said the restrictions could not prevent people from continuing to demonstrate. "How long will this go on? The entire city cannot be barricaded," he said, adding that people were still reaching Delhi despite the restrictions and being taken away in buses.
Sibal also spoke about CJP legal team head Ratna Singh, saying she was travelling with lawyers Tara Narula and Shubhangini Sharma from Jangpura towards the Supreme Court when two vehicles blocked their car.
According to Sibal, one of the persons who approached the vehicle claimed to be from the Intelligence Bureau. The occupants were asked to get out but remained inside, following which Narula contacted him for advice, he said.
Sibal said an application seeking registration of an FIR against those who intercepted the vehicle was moved before a magistrate around 11 am. The court raised the issue of territorial jurisdiction, which was contested, and reserved its order around 11.15 am, he said.
The order was not pronounced by the time of the press conference, Sibal said.
He also criticised the disruption of transport and communication, saying train services had been affected and people were unable to contact others because of internet restrictions.
Sibal said the protests concerned alleged irregularities in electoral rolls and the demand for Kumar's resignation. He alleged that concerns over voter-list irregularities had repeatedly been raised before the Supreme Court without relief.
"We are tired of going to the Supreme Court. I feel that I have in my mind that there is no point in me going there," he said but clarified that he was expressing his personal view.
Asked whether he was unhappy with the Chief Justice of India, Sibal said the issue was not one of personal satisfaction.
"We are lawyers. We are not talking about happiness or unhappiness. We have to fight for the people," he said.
Rejecting the suggestion that separate demonstrations by different groups reflected a fragmented movement, Sibal said people did not need to belong to the same political party to protest.
"Protests are protests... How many people will you take in buses? For how long will you take them? For how many months?" he asked.
(With inputs from PTI)
