New Delhi: Supreme Court Refuses to Reconstitute Panel on Police Excesses
The court asked the HPEC to proceed with its inquiry into the use of pellet guns, alleged targeted violence and harassment of female protesters.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has refused to reconstitute a five-member high-powered committee set up to examine alleged police excesses against student protesters in Delhi, observing that the allegations against the panel were based on conjecture and preconceived notions.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana said the committee had been constituted to assist the court with the highest standards of fairness and transparency and with a dispassionate approach.
Underscoring that the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) was not constituted to espouse the cause of either party, the apex court said: “We are not inclined to effect any alteration in the constitution of the committee, particularly where the prayer for such reconstitution proceeds on nothing more than conjecture and preconceived notions, articulated even before the HPEC has embarked upon its enquiry.”
The court asked the HPEC to proceed with its inquiry into the use of pellet guns, alleged targeted violence and harassment of female protesters, and allegations of excessive violence and destruction of property by both sides.
“With respect to the concerns voiced over the treatment of witnesses and of those who may wish to come forward before the HPEC to furnish their account and voice their grievances, we request the HPEC that such vulnerable witnesses be extended due protection and their identities be kept confidential and undisclosed,” the court said in its September 10 order, which was uploaded online on Tuesday.
“It goes without saying that utmost confidentiality shall be maintained in respect of any statements given or evidence submitted by such vulnerable witnesses to the HPEC.
In furtherance thereof, a separate online portal may be created to facilitate such witnesses and other requisite stakeholders to submit their documents and evidence,” it added.
The court directed that senior advocate Monika Gusain, along with advocate C. Solomon, would assist it as a representative of the HPEC and act as an independent arbiter between the parties.
“We also request the HPEC to appoint a member-secretary at the earliest to facilitate any logistical or other secretarial assistance that it may require in the discharge of its functions,” the court said.
Earlier, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners seeking the panel’s reconstitution, alleged that one of its members, a former director-general of police of a northeastern state, had a “conflict of interest.” He claimed that the member was a close friend of a senior functionary likely to come under investigation.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan supported Bhushan’s submission.
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta opposed the submissions and asked the court to disregard the allegations.
The court constituted the HPEC, headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy, to examine allegations of police excesses against student protesters during the Cockroach Janta Party-led march in Delhi on July 20, as well as violence against police personnel.
The other members are former Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi High Court judge Justice Shalinder Kaur, former CBI director Rishi Kumar Shukla and retired Meghalaya DGP L.R. Bishnoi.
The CJP-led march to Parliament in July witnessed clashes between protesters and security personnel, who used lathis and teargas shells to disperse the crowds.
The agitation, which began at Jantar Mantar on June 20, was called off on July 25 after then Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan resigned and the government accepted the CJP’s other demands.
