The Supreme Court said states, including Delhi, may withdraw FIRs against students who protested the NEET paper leak if they have no criminal antecedents involving grave and heinous offences.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday clarified that the governments of Delhi and other states can close or withdraw FIRs against students who participated in protests against the NEET paper leak, provided they do not have antecedents involving grave and heinous offences.

A three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued the clarification while hearing a batch of pleas alleging police excesses during protests, including the July 20 march in Delhi.
“It is clarified that NCT of Delhi and any other state shall be at liberty to close or withdraw FIRs against protesters... The word criminal antecedents is to be read as grave and heinous offences,” the Supreme Court said.
The clarification came after the Centre submitted that it was “serious” about not pursuing FIRs against student protesters, except those with criminal antecedents.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “There was some misapprehension about what to do with the FIRs against the protesters. I have instructions to say that the government is serious about that commitment. Those who had criminal antecedents... Except them, everything can be taken care of.”
He added that FIRs against more than 2,700 people with antecedents involving grave and heinous offences would not be withdrawn.
Senior advocate Vrinda Grover said the issue was whether cases should be withdrawn or FIRs quashed. “It was about improvement in the education system. These are young people who have their lives ahead of them. Even for quashing, we have FIRs filed in Bihar, West Bengal, Assam, UP and Delhi. After this has been worked out with the states, we will come back to this court,” she said, adding that individual public prosecutors seeking closure was a tedious process.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan submitted, “The videos are very shocking. We have given 300 videos to the court. Since directions have come from the top, the Commissioner of police must look at all this. Ideally, we have identified un-uniformed individuals committing such police excess. A direction has to go to the Commissioner of police and the RAF director as to why police used pellet guns etc.”
He added, “We have placed videos. We are inviting the court's attention to this serious. Let the affidavit answer these questions. The responsibility has to be fixed.”
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi said the term “criminal antecedents” required clarity, noting that it could include minor or politically motivated cases.
The Chief Justice of India observed, “A police officer involved in excessive force should not be unduly protected. And it should not be that a hardened criminal under the garb of student protest is also getting protected.”
On the use of pellet guns, Ms Grover said, “The petition (on pellet guns) is not saying that the police should not have anything to protect itself. But this particular weapon is unfit for use.”
The Supreme Court said it would lay down a protocol governing the use of pellet guns and posted the matter for further hearing on August 18.
In a related matter, before another bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, the Centre said it would place on record the process adopted in handling NEET question papers, from printing to distribution, through an affidavit. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought time for this and the matter was posted for hearing on Thursday.
The Chief Justice of India-led bench had earlier observed that police excesses or a “lathi charge” cannot be justified merely due to an agitation and underlined that the right to peaceful protest was “absolutely guaranteed”.
Following the court’s clarification, the Cockroach Janta Party, which led the agitation, urged the government to act. Its spokesperson Saurav Das said, “Now that the Supreme Court has removed confusions, we expect the Government of India and all BJP/NDA-ruled states to immediately honour the assurances given on July 25 to the youth of this country.”
“We also continue to closely monitor developments across states and remain in constant dialogue with senior representatives of the Union Government. We expect the assurances to be implemented in both letter and spirit. The youth of this country honoured their word. It is now time for the Government to honour its own immediately,” he said.
He added, “From Day 1, the Cockroach Janta Party has stood by every student and every protester, providing legal assistance, medical support, and every other form of help within our means. That commitment remains unchanged. We thank all lawyers across the country who continue to help the protesters.”
The July 20 “Sansad Chalo” march in Delhi had seen clashes between protesters and security personnel, who used lathis and teargas shells to disperse crowds attempting to move towards Parliament.
One of the petitions before the court seeks nationwide guidelines to regulate police action during public protests, including restrictions on the use of plainclothes personnel for crowd control, safeguards on prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and an independent probe into the police action during the July 20 protest.


Tags: