E-Paper
Jantar Mantar July protests: Supreme Court asks enquiry panel to submit reports in a month on police crackdown, alleged brutality
The five-member committee told the court that its complaints portal became operational on October 14 but had received only a few complaints so far.
Prefer HTon Google
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the high-powered enquiry committee (HPEC), examining complaints of police excesses and violence during the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP)-led July protests at Jantar Mantar, to submit its fact-finding reports within a month, after the panel informed the court that its complaints portal became operational on October 14.
The five-member committee, formed in August under the chairmanship of former Supreme Court judge, justice (retd) R Subhash Reddy, informed the court in a confidential report that only a few complaints had been received on the portal, with no complainant appearing in person or approaching the committee through email.
The bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “We would like the committee to start submitting its fact-finding reports.”
The court referred to its August 18 and September 10 orders, which had asked the committee to consider submitting reports on two priority issues: targeted violence, harassment and molestation of women protesters; and grievous harm and injuries allegedly caused to protesters by police and security personnel, including the need for interim compensation.
Posting the matter for December 2, the bench said, “The committee may submit an interim report on the priority issues identified by us.”
Also read: More complaints from cops than students over July 20 protest: SC-appointed panel
Complaints and Material for the Committee
The court asked the petitioners to encourage victims and complainants to file their representations with the committee. At the same time, it clarified that the panel need not wait indefinitely for complaints. “Whatever information and material is submitted by the parties, including material submitted by petitioners on behalf of the victims, will be examined and considered,” the bench said.
The court also said that since complainants were not required to disclose victims’ identities, petitioners could share with the HPEC material already submitted before the court, including copies of petitions and video clips attached to them.
The committee’s confidential report was circulated only among the judges. Senior advocate Monika Gusain, assisting the court as amicus curiae, said the reports were not being shared with her. Petitioners represented by senior advocates N Hariharan and Gopal Sankaranarayanan also said they were unable to assist the court without knowing the contents of the HPEC reports.
Also read: Supreme Court panel opens portal for complaints over violence on July 20 Delhi protest
The bench said the committee had not yet begun preparing action-taken reports on the 12 issues identified by the court in its August 18 order. “Unless we find something extraordinary requiring details of the complainants to be kept confidential, we would like to share the relevant contents of the reports,” it indicated.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, opposed sharing the report with the petitioners. “The victims are not approaching the committee and instead, third parties are seeking to approach on their behalf. There may be the possibility of an exaggeration in the petition which is not there in reality. Someone may say there are 50 victims when there are only five,” he said.
Sankaranarayanan told the court that the HPEC appeared to be prioritising complaints filed directly by victims over material submitted by petitioners on their behalf. He cited a communication from the committee saying that the material submitted by the petitioner would be considered in “due course”.
The bench clarified that the committee was waiting for all material to be submitted before proceeding to examine it.
Also read: Pellet guns, harassment of women, cop injuries focus of SC panel's probe into CJP protest
Disciplinary Action Against Police
The bench also clarified that its August 18 order should not be interpreted as a direction to initiate disciplinary action against police personnel found to have committed excesses.
The August 18 order had said that the constitution of the HPEC would not prevent police authorities or security forces from taking administrative or disciplinary action against officers found to have violated conduct rules.
Citing this, petitioners claimed that no departmental action had been initiated against police personnel allegedly involved in the excesses.
“We would like to clarify two things: Our order is not a mandate. Second, we only clarified that the power of police authorities to discipline its employees is not cluttered by our order. If they decide to take action, it is under their purview,” the bench told the petitioners.
Mehta said police personnel had also suffered serious injuries and that the issue had been referred to the committee. “I will not put the cart before the horse. If the committee comes to the conclusion that there was any transgression on our part, we will obey it,” he said.
The bench said it would be in a better position to decide on each of the 12 issues once the committee submitted its reports. It also directed Delhi Police to file a comprehensive response to the petitions, while granting it liberty to submit separate affidavits on specific issues arising in the batch of petitions.
Also read: HPEC to prioritise complaints of sexual assault during NEET protests: SC
Petitions and Committee Membership
The petitions before the top court include those filed by members of Parliament, former civil servants, public-spirited individuals and lawyers, who accused police of using excessive force against students and other protesters at Jantar Mantar. The protesters had demanded the resignation of then Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The agitation was called off on July 25, following his resignation.
The court also entertained a petition filed by families of more than 200 police personnel who were injured while on duty during the protests.
Besides justice Reddy, the HPEC comprises former Punjab and Haryana high court chief justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi high court judge Shalinder Kaur, former CBI director Rishi Kumar Shukla and former Meghalaya director general of police LR Bishnoi.
On Thursday, the court received a letter from Bishnoi seeking permission to resign from the committee. It allowed his request and asked the panel to indicate whether it required a replacement.
Frequently Asked Questions
