New Delhi: The conduct of the Indian Youth Congress (IYC) workers arrested for protesting at the AI Impact Summit venue was not legitimate dissent, rather a “blatant assault on public order” that also hurt the country’s “diplomatic image”, a Delhi court said.
Judicial Magistrate Ravi made the observation on Saturday when the four IYC workers who were held for the “shirtless” protest at the Bharat Mandapam here were produced before his court. The court allowed five days of custody to the police to question them.
Summarising the reasons for allowing the Delhi Police’s plea seeking custodial interrogation, the magistrate said that the accused hailed from remote parts of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Telangana, posing a high risk of their absconding.
This was “further heightened by early investigation findings suggesting external conspiracy links, the court said.
A portion of the order passed by judicial magistrate Ravi, accessed by PTI, said that the protest imperilled or jeopardised not only the event’s sanctity, but also the country’s diplomatic image.
“…The accused persons are alleged to have orchestrated a premeditated intrusion into the high-security precincts of Bharat Mandapam during the Al Summit 2026, a premier international conclave hosting global delegates and dignitaries,” the court’s order said.
It said the protestors allegedly “donned provocative T-shirts bearing offensive slogans such as ‘India US Trade Deal Compromised’, vociferously raised incendiary chants, obstructed public servants in the execution of their duties, and perpetrated physical assaults causing grievous injuries to police personnel, as substantiated by the medico-legal cases (MLCs) on record.”
The magistrate said, “Such conduct palpably transcends the ambit of legitimate dissent, metamorphosing into a blatant assault on public order. It imperils not merely the event’s sanctity but also the Republic’s diplomatic image before foreign stakeholders, rendering it wholly unprotected by constitutional safeguards.”
The magistrate said the probe reveals that multiple associates could be absconding, which could tamper digital footprints, financial trails, and co-accused disclosures.
