LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Delhi High Court questions police over alleged confinement of activist Nadeem Khan ahead of Jantar Mantar protest

12/10/2026BlogNo Comments

The Delhi High Court on Monday questioned the Delhi Police over allegations that activist Nadeem Khan was confined to his residence for nearly eight hours and prevented from attending a protest at Jantar Mantar on September 29.

A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma asked the police to explain the legal basis for entering Khan’s premises and restricting his movement, observing that the denial of permission to protest did not authorise the police to confine him.

The Court questioned the police regarding their entry into the man’s home and the legal justification for his confinement, remarking that while denying permission was within their rights, they needed to show the legal basis for executing their duties in such a manner.

Appearing for the Delhi Police, its counsel submitted that permission to hold the protest had been denied to Khan, but the authorities had received information that he intended to attend it regardless.

Referring to photographs showing police personnel sitting with Khan at the reception area, the counsel said there had been no detention and that the police had only restricted his movement. The counsel also submitted that the police had not visited him thereafter.

The Court issued notice to the police and sought a status report within two weeks. It also recorded the police’s statement that Khan would not be disturbed through telephone calls.

Earlier, advocate Shahrukh Alam, appearing for Khan, alleged that the activist had been facing continued harassment and surveillance by the police.

Khan, National Secretary of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) and founder of United Against Hate, has approached the High Court challenging his alleged confinement by the Delhi Police on September 29. He has sought compensation for the alleged violation of his fundamental rights and an independent inquiry into the conduct of the police personnel involved.

According to the petition, a team of police personnel from Shaheen Bagh police station arrived at the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind headquarters in Abul Fazal Enclave at around 9:30 am on September 29 and prevented Khan from leaving until approximately 5:30 pm.

The restriction allegedly prevented him from attending a peaceful protest scheduled at Jantar Mantar at 3 pm against alleged attacks on places of worship.

Khan has claimed that he was neither formally arrested nor informed of the grounds for his confinement. He has further alleged that the police did not issue any written order or comply with the statutory safeguards governing arrest and detention.

The petition also alleges continued police surveillance and harassment, referring to telephone calls received from police personnel on October 2 and October 5 in connection with subsequent protest calls.

Khan has additionally challenged an undated prohibitory order issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which prohibits protests in the New Delhi area. However, his counsel informed the Court that Khan was not pressing this prayer at present.

The post Delhi High Court questions police over alleged confinement of activist Nadeem Khan ahead of Jantar Mantar protest appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Fencing Democracy 
  • When Losing Congress Becomes Trump’S Greatest Test
  • The Authority Of Prejudice
  • When Dissent Becomes A Security Threat
  • The Sir Controversy: Who Controls The Vote?

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.