NEW DELHI — A local court in Delhi has granted bail to two law students who were arrested for allegedly disrupting courtroom proceedings, hurling unparliamentary language, and using criminal force against security personnel inside the Supreme Court of India earlier this month.

In his order, Judicial Magistrate Ravi observed that while such behavior is "unequivocally deprecated," the stature and institutional permanence of the apex court are not diminished by the intemperate conduct of a single agitated, unrepresented litigant.

Disruption During Supreme Court Hearing

The incident occurred on July 10 inside Court No. 13 of the Supreme Court during the hearing of a Special Leave Petition (Civil) titled Prabal Pratap and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.

According to the police, Prabal Pratap Singh (24), a third-year law student at Lucknow University appearing as a petitioner-in-person, disrupted the proceedings by uttering abusive words aimed toward judicial authorities, hurling papers across the courtroom, and using force against security personnel on duty. He was accompanied by Chander Bhan (23), a second-year law student from Raebareli. Both were taken into custody following the incident.

Court Stresses Institutional Restraint

In the order dated July 27, Judicial Magistrate Ravi underscored that grievances do not give litigants a license to undermine judicial decorum:

"A litigant, howsoever aggrieved by the outcome of his cause or howsoever unrepresented, does not thereby acquire licence to hurl papers in open court or direct abusive language at the presiding authority, much less at the office of the Chief Justice of India."

However, the magistrate noted that the Supreme Court bench itself had handled the disturbance on July 10 with considerable equanimity, choosing not to take punitive action against the young petitioner. Subordinate courts assessing consequences at the bail stage, the magistrate added, ought to be guided by the same institutional restraint.

Bail Principles and Order

Emphasizing that pre-trial detention should not serve as an instrument of punishment before conviction, the court highlighted key factors supporting bail:

  • The Delhi Police had completed its probe, and no custodial interrogation or further recovery was necessary.

  • The alleged offenses—including obstructing and assaulting a public servant—carry a maximum penalty of two years.

  • Both accused have verified addresses and roots in society, posing no real risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.

The court subsequently ordered the release of both students upon furnishing a personal bond and surety bond of ₹25,000 each. The bail is subject to standard conditions, including cooperating with future trial proceedings and maintaining strict decorum across all judicial forums.