Mass detention of Delhi protesters draws scrutiny from legal experts

A demonstrator shouts slogans from inside a police bus after being detained during a protest organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), at Connaught Place, in New Delhi | Photo Credit: PTI

Amid large-scale detentions across the national capital on Saturday (October 10, 2026), as police sought to thwart a youth protest demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar over deletions of names from electoral rolls, legal experts questioned the basis on which Delhi Police detained protesters beyond the New Delhi district, where prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) are in force.

Among those detained on Saturday were Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) representatives Abhijeet Dipke, Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka, who were taken into custody after police boarded their Air India flight upon its arrival in Delhi. CJP legal wing head Ratna Singh alleged that police prevented her from leaving her residence in Jangpura, while YouTuber Dhruv Rathee was detained at a residential flat in Gurugram.

Several instances of protesters being picked up and taken away in buses were also reported through the day, with some alleging that they were not informed of the grounds for their detention, raising concerns over compliance with constitutional safeguards governing deprivation of personal liberty.

Section 163 of the BNSS, which replaced Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), empowers an executive magistrate to issue prohibitory orders where “immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable”.