‘We Have to See Their Future’: Supreme Court Rejects Plea Seeking Free Hand for Delhi Police in Dealing with Protesters
The Supreme Court of India on October 9, 2026, rejected a petition seeking to give the Delhi Police a free hand in dealing with protesters and ordering an independent investigation into cases registered following the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led demonstrations at Jantar Mantar in July. The bench emphasised that the future of young students, their parents and their families must be considered while dealing with cases arising from protests.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana declined to entertain the plea, which sought directions to the Centre, the Delhi government and the police to ensure an independent and fair investigation into the cases linked to the demonstrations against the alleged NEET-UG paper leak.
The petition was filed by L. Ramanathan, who also sought a declaration that the police should be allowed to exercise their investigative and law-enforcement functions independently, without interference unless their actions violated the law. The plea argued that questions surrounding the handling of the protest-related cases required a fair examination.
Chief Justice Surya Kant indicated that the petition effectively sought to reopen the Supreme Court’s earlier decision to quash the FIRs covered by its order. The court had invoked Article 142 of the Constitution, which empowers it to pass orders necessary to do complete justice, to bring the specified proceedings against student protesters to an end.
The bench explained that the earlier decision was guided by the need to protect young students from the potentially lasting consequences of criminal proceedings. Prolonged litigation, the court indicated, could affect not only the students but also their parents and families, particularly when the accused were at an important stage of their education and careers.
The cases originated from the July 20 ‘Sansad Chalo’ demonstration organised by CJP at Jantar Mantar over allegations of a NEET paper leak and irregularities in the education system. The demonstrations led to the registration of multiple FIRs following allegations of violence and other disturbances. The protesters had demanded accountability over examination-related concerns affecting students across the country.
The Supreme Court had subsequently intervened in the matter, allowing the closure or quashing of specified cases involving student protesters. The relief was intended to prevent young participants from being drawn into lengthy criminal proceedings, while the court had also distinguished their circumstances from those of individuals facing allegations involving serious criminal conduct.
In dismissing the latest petition, the court declined to grant the requested directions for a fresh investigation or a declaration giving the police the unrestricted authority sought by the petitioner. The decision does not, by itself, establish that every allegation concerning police conduct during the demonstrations was proved or disproved.
The ruling brings renewed attention to the balance between maintaining public order and protecting citizens’ rights to peaceful assembly. While police authorities are responsible for enforcing the law and managing demonstrations, their actions remain subject to legal and constitutional safeguards.
The court’s observations also underline the importance of considering the long-term consequences of criminal proceedings involving young people. At the same time, the judgment leaves the broader questions surrounding police conduct and the regulation of public protests within the framework of applicable law and judicial oversight.
