Delhi Metro ridership plunges by 26 lakh during anti-CEC protests, DMRC tells Supreme Court

The Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that passenger traffic on its network fell by nearly 45 per cent during the October 10 protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, with approximately 26 lakh fewer commuters travelling compared with a normal second Saturday.

In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the corporation maintained that Metro services were neither curtailed nor cancelled during the demonstrations, despite restrictions on passenger entry and exit at 45 stations. It said all 4,157 scheduled train trips were operated and 258 of the network's 303 stations remained fully accessible throughout the day.

The submission came amid contempt proceedings initiated by the Supreme Court over restrictions imposed on Metro and railway services ahead of the demonstrations organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and student organisations. The protests were held to demand Kumar's resignation over alleged irregularities in the revision of electoral rolls.

𝗥𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗳𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗯𝘆 𝟰𝟱 𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁

According to the DMRC, approximately 32 lakh passengers travelled on the Metro network on October 10, compared with around 58 lakh passengers on a normal second Saturday. The difference of 26 lakh passengers represented a decline of nearly 45 per cent.

The corporation attributed the fall to the protests, arguing that the demonstrations adversely affected ordinary citizens and prompted many commuters to avoid travelling.

In its submission, the DMRC said the decline indicated that people had been compelled to forego routine activities, including travelling to workplaces, conducting business and attending to other daily commitments.

However, the affidavit's figures establish a substantial reduction in ridership, not the precise number of passengers who stayed away specifically because of the protests. The corporation's explanation of the decline forms part of its submissions before the court.

The DMRC maintained that the reduction in passenger numbers should not be interpreted as evidence of a reduction in Metro operations, asserting that its scheduled services continued throughout the day.

𝗔𝗹𝗹 𝟰,𝟭𝟱𝟳 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗽𝘀 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱

Seeking to counter allegations that public transport services had been disrupted in violation of judicial directions, the DMRC said it deployed 271 trains on October 10 in accordance with the standard Saturday timetable.

The corporation maintained that all 4,157 scheduled trips were completed across the network without any reduction in the number of services.

It argued that restrictions on passenger movement at certain stations were different from the cancellation or suspension of train operations.

The affidavit stated that the network, apart from the 45 stations covered by the modified restrictions, remained operational throughout October 10.

The DMRC also maintained that the restrictions were introduced following assessments by law enforcement agencies and in accordance with their directions.

𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆, 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗯𝘀 𝗮𝘁 𝟰𝟱 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

The affidavit disclosed that entry and exit restrictions were imposed at 45 of the Delhi Metro's 303 stations, representing approximately 15 per cent of the network.

The original communication from Delhi Police, issued ahead of the protests, had proposed restrictions at 57 stations. However, following the Supreme Court's intervention on October 9 and a subsequent reassessment of security requirements, the number was reduced to 45.

The remaining 258 stations, accounting for more than 85 per cent of the network, continued to operate without such access restrictions, according to the corporation.

The DMRC further said that interchange facilities remained available at 14 of the 45 affected stations.

These included major transport hubs such as Rajiv Chowk, Kashmere Gate, Central Secretariat, Mandi House, Hauz Khas, Dilli Haat-INA and Netaji Subhash Place.

The corporation argued that maintaining interchange facilities helped preserve connectivity across the Metro network even where entry and exit gates were restricted.

𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀

The DMRC informed the court that arrangements had been made at several affected stations to facilitate passenger movement while complying with police restrictions.

At Vishwavidyalaya station, where entry and exit gates are physically separated, the exit gates remained operational to allow passengers arriving by train to leave the station.

At GTB Nagar, passenger movement was manually regulated by personnel deployed on the ground. Gate No. 3 remained open to facilitate exits.

The corporation maintained that these arrangements demonstrated an attempt to balance security requirements with the need to minimise inconvenience to commuters.

It also said additional personnel and ground marshals were deployed at major interchange stations to guide passengers and manage movement.

Information about the restrictions was circulated through the DMRC's social media accounts, official website and Sarthi mobile application.

Announcements were made through the operations control centre and inside Metro trains, while signboards were displayed at station gates to inform passengers about the restrictions.

The limitations on entry and exit at the 45 stations were lifted at 10 pm on October 10, the affidavit stated.

𝗦𝗖 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝗼𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗯𝘀

The dispute arose after authorities announced extensive restrictions on Metro and railway services ahead of the October 10 demonstrations in central Delhi.

On October 9, the Supreme Court intervened after concerns were raised that the proposed measures could effectively suspend essential public transport services and cause widespread inconvenience.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the original restrictions appeared excessive because they contemplated a complete prohibition on certain Metro and railway movements.

The court distinguished between regulating public transport for security reasons and imposing an outright ban on essential services.

It directed the authorities to reassess the proposed restrictions and permit Metro and railway operations in a regulated manner consistent with the principle of proportionality.

The court also called for adequate publicity of revised transport arrangements so that commuters would be informed about the services available during the demonstrations.

The DMRC's latest affidavit was filed in compliance with those directions.

𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴

The matter subsequently led to contempt proceedings over allegations that restrictions imposed by the authorities had violated the Supreme Court's directions.

A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices to Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar and DMRC Chairperson D Thara after finding a prima facie basis to examine the contempt allegations.

The authorities were directed to submit responses and compliance reports explaining the restrictions and the measures taken to implement the court's earlier order.

The DMRC's affidavit seeks to establish that the corporation complied with the judicial directions by maintaining train operations while regulating passenger access at selected stations.

The petitioners, however, have questioned whether the continued restrictions at 45 stations were consistent with the Supreme Court's directions, notwithstanding the reduction from the original 57.

The court will have to determine whether the measures amounted to permissible regulation of public transport or violated its earlier directions against blanket restrictions.

𝗡𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗢𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗯𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟱

The contempt proceedings are scheduled to be heard on October 15 after the matter was adjourned earlier this week because of Justice V Mohana's ill health.

The Supreme Court will examine the compliance reports and responses submitted by the authorities, including the DMRC's account of train operations, station restrictions and commuter access.

The case raises questions about the extent to which public transport services can be restricted during political demonstrations and whether security measures affecting large numbers of commuters satisfy constitutional requirements of proportionality.

While the DMRC maintains that no scheduled train services were cancelled, the petitioners continue to challenge the restrictions imposed at individual stations.

The Supreme Court has yet to determine whether the authorities complied with its October 9 directions.