The Supreme Court will hear on Monday two petitions alleging excessive use of police force against students participating in protests across the country over repeated examination paper leaks and alleged irregularities in competitive examinations, including NEET-UG.
The matter was mentioned on Friday before the Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who informed the Court that both writ petitions had been duly instituted, assigned diary numbers by the Registry and that all concerned States had been impleaded as parties.
Seeking urgent intervention, Sankaranarayanan submitted that incidents of alleged police excesses against student protesters were continuing across the country and warranted immediate judicial scrutiny. Taking note of the submissions, the Bench directed that the petitions be listed for hearing on Monday.
The listing assumes significance as earlier in the day the CJI had clarified in open court that no writ petition concerning the July 20 police action had been filed before the Supreme Court until that stage. Referring to media reports suggesting that the Court had refused to entertain such a plea, the CJI observed that the Registry had verified its records and found that no petition had been instituted.
He clarified that what had earlier been placed before the Court was only a representation and not a properly filed writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.
One of the petitions, filed through Advocate-on-Record Chand Qureshi by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, seeks enforcement of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 19(1)(d), 16 and 21 of the Constitution. The respondents include the Union of India, the Government of NCT of Delhi, the Commissioner of Delhi Police and all States and Union Territories.
The petition challenged the police action during the July 20 “Chalo Sansad” march organised as part of the nationwide agitation over examination paper leaks. It alleged that students and other demonstrators attempting to march towards Parliament were met with excessive police force, including barricading, lathi-charge, use of tear gas, arbitrary detention and physical assault.
It further alleged gender-based misconduct against female protesters and claims that unidentified or plainclothes personnel participated in crowd-control operations. According to the petition, at least 60 protesters sustained injuries during the police action, necessitating an independent investigation.
The plea sought the constitution of an independent Judicial Commission or a Special Investigation Team headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to inquire into the alleged police excesses, arbitrary detentions and allegations of gender-based violence during the July 20 protests.
It further sought directions for registration of FIRs against police personnel allegedly involved in assaults and misconduct, along with their identification, suspension and prosecution in accordance with law.
The petition further seeks comprehensive guidelines regulating police action during peaceful public demonstrations. It prays for a prohibition on deploying plainclothes or unidentified personnel for crowd-control duties or arrests, relying on the Supreme Court’s decisions in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal and Somnath v. State of Maharashtra, which mandate that police officers carrying out arrests must display clear identification.
It also sought the formulation of a Standard Operating Procedure governing the exercise of powers under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which replaced Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The petitioner contended that repeated and prolonged invocation of prohibitory orders has effectively converted the constitutional right to peaceful assembly into a permission-based regime and that blanket or recurring restrictions imposed without any proximate threat to public order fail the constitutional tests of legality, necessity and proportionality.
The petition additionally raised a constitutional challenge to the application of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which criminalises acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India. It argued that the provision was vague, overbroad and capable of being invoked against peaceful political dissent and academic criticism, thereby producing a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech and peaceful protest.
The petition also alleged that restrictions imposed during the protests, including closure of Metro stations and suspension of mobile internet services, disrupted access to banking, telemedicine, remote work, education, emergency services and daily commuting, thereby affecting the rights of a much wider section of the public.
The Supreme Court proceedings come amid parallel litigation before the Delhi High Court, where petitions challenging the alleged police crackdown and the suspension of mobile internet services around Jantar Mantar are already pending. The High Court has directed the authorities to preserve CCTV footage, videography and other records relating to the police action and has sought responses from the Union Government and the Delhi Police.
The post Supreme Court to hear plea alleging police excesses against Jantar Mantar protesters appeared first on India Legal.