New Delhi – India’s Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the immediate release of student protesters detained during recent nationwide demonstrations against examination paper leaks and other systemic irregularities. The court also indicated it may form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to independently probe allegations of excessive police force during the protests, which saw clashes across several states. A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant issued a series of interim directions, emphasizing the constitutional right to peaceful protest.
Top Court Addresses Police Conduct
The Supreme Court bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, heard a batch of petitions detailing alleged police brutality against students. These pleas highlighted incidents such as the use of shock batons, pellet guns, and physical assaults, with one petition even alleging the use of an AK-47 by an officer in Bihar. Thecourt acknowledged that these allegations, at first glance, establish a compelling case for an impartial inquiry.[livelaw+7]
CJI Surya Kant underscored that peaceful protests are constitutionally protected. He stated that police excesses, including lathi charges, cannot be justified simply because an agitation is underway. Thecourt also expressed the need for a revised protocol for police handling of demonstrations, calling existing guidelines outdated.[livelaw+6]
Interim Directions Issued
In its Tuesday order, the Supreme Court directed all states to release children under 18 years old and other student protesters who do not have any criminal records. Thecourt specifically barred authorities from taking any coercive action against these eligible students. However, this protection does not extend to individuals with prior criminal antecedents.[livelaw+13]
The bench also issued crucial directives for evidence preservation. It ordered all relevant authorities to safeguard CCTV footage, drone recordings, body-worn camera footage, wireless communication records, and Police Control Room (PCR) logs related to the protests. Furthermore, the court mandated that the personal information and digital data of protesters must be preserved but not disclosed to the public domain.[livelaw+11]
Background of Protests and Allegations
The nationwide student protests, spearheaded by the "Cockroach Janta Party" (CJP), erupted around July 20. Students demonstrated against widespread examination paper leaks, including the NEET exam, and other systemic irregularities, demanding reforms in the National Testing Agency and the resignation of the then-Education Minister. A "Sansad Chalo" (March to Parliament) in Delhi on July 20 led to significant clashes between protesters and security personnel.[livelaw+9]
Petitions before the Supreme Court detailed severe injuries suffered by students, including a 19-year-old reportedly losing an eye due to pellet gun injuries, and allegations of molestation of young women. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing one of the petitioners, referred to credible media reports and photographic evidence of excessive force.[livemint+5]
Conversely, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that over 200 police personnel sustained injuries during the demonstrations. He suggested that "miscreants" and anti-social elements might have infiltrated the otherwise peaceful student gatherings, leading to violence. Chief Justice Kant also acknowledged the possibility of such infiltration.[thenewsminute+9]
Next Steps in the Investigation
The Supreme Court sought responses from the Union government, the Delhi NCT, and the Chief Secretaries of states including Assam, Bihar, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Kerala. These states are where significant protests and alleged police actions occurred. Thecourt indicated that a high-powered committee or a Special Investigation Team, potentially led by a former Supreme Court judge, would be considered for a thorough, fair, and independent inquiry into all allegations.[livelaw+9]
CJI Kant stressed the importance of fixing responsibility, stating that a probe is "meaningless if no responsibility is fixed." Thecourt clarified that while states can continue their investigations into registered FIRs, no coercive action should be taken against eligible student protesters. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on Monday, August 3, 2026.[livelaw+10]
