Amaan Rastogi, a 26-year-old journalist with the digital news platform Molitics, has filed a contempt petition in the Supreme Court.

The petition alleges wilful disobedience of the Court's order dated 11.10.2026 in Shailendra Mani Tripathi v. Govind Mohan & Ors. (Contempt Petition (C) Diary No. 63801/2026 in W.P.(C) Diary No. 63560/2026). Rastogi uses they/them pronouns.

In that order, a Bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana recorded the Solicitor General's assurance that lawyers, journalists and other professionals would not be impeded. In paragraph 16(f), the Court directed that they "shall not be hindered in discharge of their professional duties in any manner whatsoever."

The petition states that Rastogi was first detained on 10.10.2026 near Connaught Place / Baba Kharak Singh Marg while reporting on the protests. They had their Molitics press ID visibly displayed. They were detained after questioning police about the detention of civilians, including a 16-year-old juvenile, and were allegedly manhandled and put into a DTC bus. Video of the detention, showing Rastogi holding up their press ID from the bus window, was widely shared on social media, including by journalist Radhika Bordia.

The petition further alleges that on 11.10.2026, after the Supreme Court's order, Rastogi was detained again at about 3:30 p.m. near Minto Road. At the time they were simply riding their motorcycle towards Connaught Place. It is alleged that police recognised them from the previous day, prevented them from recording, and took their phone. The phone was allegedly kept for about three hours without a seizure memo and returned damaged. Rastogi's press ID was allegedly thrown into a sewer. No detention memo was prepared on either day, the petition says.

The petition argues that Rastogi fully complied with the Delhi Police's own "Guidelines for journalists" of 05.10.2026, which ask journalists to keep ID cards visibly displayed. It contends the detention breached both paragraph 16(f) and the Solicitor General's assurance recorded in paragraph 15, and violated Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g) and 21.

The contemnors named are the Union Home Secretary, the Delhi Police Commissioner, the DCP (New Delhi District) and the SHO, Kamla Market Police Station. The petition seeks:

- initiation of contempt proceedings

- a personal affidavit from the Delhi Police Commissioner disclosing the legal authority for the detentions, the names and belt numbers of the personnel involved, the DD/GD entries, the reasons no detention or seizure memo was prepared, and whether Minto Road fell within any Section 163 BNSS prohibitory order

- tagging with the main matter listed on 13.10.2026

Drawn by: Spriha Pachauri, AdvocateFiled through: Abiha Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record