The Delhi High Court on Wednesday agreed to hear urgently a plea filed by Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) activists Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka seeking their release from custody in connection with the Jantar Mantar trespassing case.

The development comes on the day their judicial custody is due to end, with the two activists also scheduled to be produced before the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) court.

CJP’s legal affairs head, Ratna Singh, said on Tuesday that the duo had moved the High Court and requested an urgent hearing at night.

“We have moved the Delhi High Court and requested an urgent night hearing. Saurav and Ashutosh should not spend a single minute behind bars. Their liberty must not be curtailed because of political games. Justice must not wait,” she said in a post on X.

On Monday, SEM Ritu Raj had extended their custody, observing that their conduct “shows no respect for law” and reflects their “habitualness in calling protest at de-notified areas”.

In its order, the SEM court said the Investigating Officer had placed substantial material on record, raising concerns over the likelihood of a breach of peace and disturbance of public tranquillity.

It also recorded that the two leaders had allegedly breached the bonds furnished by them before the SEM, South-West District, on October 11 and subsequently committed a breach of peace in the present case.

The SEM further observed that their assurance that they would not repeat the alleged offence did not inspire confidence in view of their past conduct and the material placed on record by the Investigating Officer.

Das and Ranka, along with party member Ajinkya Shinde, were among 14 people detained on October 13 after they allegedly entered Jantar Mantar through private premises and obstructed police personnel from discharging their official duties.

The CJP members were protesting against alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and had raised slogans against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

Delhi Police had justified their continued custody, citing repeated violations of law and apprehensions that their release could lead to further violations and instigation of others.

The SEM court had also found the sureties furnished on behalf of the two leaders unfit following an enquiry, citing discrepancies in identity documents and their inability to provide basic details about the persons for whom they stood surety. It had directed them to furnish fresh sureties.

A 52-year-old truck driver lost his life after being hit by a vehicle near Machlilok under the Mufassil police station area in West Champaran district on Wednesday. The vehicle reportedly bore a sign identifying it as belonging to the Senior DSP (Administration) at the DIG’s office, according to the deceased’s brother.

The deceased was identified as Sheikh Arman, son of Sheikh Serajul Haque and a resident of Beldari Ward No. 35.

According to his brother, Mohammad Nezam, the incident occurred around 6 a.m. when Arman had parked his truck along the Bettiah-Motihari main road near Machlilok and stopped to have tea.

A vehicle allegedly struck him, leaving him seriously injured.

Police personnel travelling in the vehicle took Arman to the Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) in Bettiah for treatment.

However, he succumbed to his injuries at around 8.45 a.m., despite medical intervention.

Following his death, family members rushed to the hospital. Police sent the body for a post-mortem examination.

Nezam claimed that the vehicle involved in the accident carried a sign identifying it as belonging to the Senior DSP (Administration) at the DIG’s office.

However, there was no official confirmation regarding the identity of the driver or the other occupants of the vehicle at the time of the incident.

Arman was the eldest of five brothers and is survived by his wife, Salma Khatoon, and four sons, according to his family.

His death has plunged the family into grief, while residents of the Beldari locality were mourning the loss.

The incident has also triggered anger among local residents, particularly over the reported involvement of a vehicle bearing the police official’s designation.

No detailed official statement regarding the circumstances of the accident had been issued at the time of reporting.

Further details about the incident and the responsibility for the collision are awaited.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission (SEC) to examine allegations that candidates of the Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy-led YSRCP were prevented from filing nominations for Urban Local Body elections and decide by Thursday whether the deadline should be extended in affected municipalities.

A Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana ordered the state poll panel to keep the final list of contesting candidates on hold until October 25, pending its decision on the representations and evidence submitted by the YSRCP and other candidates.

The Justice Bagchi-led Bench said that wherever an extension is granted, candidates must be given at least 48 hours from the publication of the SEC’s decision to submit their nomination papers.

The election notification will have to be amended accordingly, the apex court ordered. It also directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to ensure adequate security at nomination centres, including police deployment and CCTV coverage, and file a compliance report.

The Supreme Court further asked the respective Superintendents of Police to provide protection to YSRCP candidates and directed that nomination papers be received by Collectors at district headquarters wherever necessary.

Observing that free and fair elections are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, the Justice Bagchi-led Bench said the right to participate in elections by filing nominations is an integral facet of the electoral process.

It said that constitutional courts could not remain entirely silent when allegations of obstruction in filing nomination papers were brought before them by a principal Opposition party, particularly when the party had submitted representations and supporting material even before the election process commenced.

“Instilling confidence in the election process is vital for the maintenance of constitutional democracy,” the Supreme Court said, stressing the need for the state authorities to ensure a level playing field.

The SEC has been asked to assess the representations on their merits, along with documentary and electronic evidence, and take appropriate measures to ensure that eligible candidates are not denied an opportunity to contest.

The matter will be heard again on October 27, when the state poll panel and the state government are required to submit compliance affidavits.

The directions came on a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the YSRCP challenging an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which refused to extend the deadline for filing nominations amid allegations of violence and obstruction during the local body election process.

The party had alleged that its candidates were prevented from filing nomination papers in several areas, including Punganur, Rayachoti, Kadapa and Tirupati, after the nomination process opened on October 16.

According to the petition, nomination papers of a candidate in Kadapa were allegedly seized and torn, while several candidates in Tirupati were prevented from entering the rooms of the Returning Officers concerned.

It also alleged that party workers and MP P.V. Midhun Reddy were attacked while travelling to file nomination papers.

The YSRCP had initially approached the High Court seeking alternative nomination centres with adequate security.

A single judge, on October 15, declined to grant the blanket relief sought but allowed individual candidates facing threats to approach the Election Officers concerned, for permission to file nominations at alternative locations.

The party subsequently sought a one-day extension of the nomination deadline, contending that the alleged disruptions had deprived its candidates of an opportunity to contest the elections.

Dismissing the application on October 18, a Division Bench of the High Court held that the nomination period had expired and that extending it at that stage would amount to interference with the election process.

The High Court also observed that the relief sought went beyond the scope of the original writ petition.

In its SLP before the Supreme Court, the YSRCP contended that restrictions on judicial intervention in election matters should not prevent constitutional courts from issuing directions to safeguard the conduct of free and fair polls.