NEET Protests: Will Not Withdraw 2700 FIRs Against Persons With Heinous Criminal Antecedents, Centre Informs Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today directed that the State government are at liberty to withdraw FIRs registered against the protestors involved in the recent protests that happened in various parts of the country over the NEET paper leak.
As a CJI Surya Kant led bench clarified that those FIRs registered against persons who are already accused of grave and heinous offences may not be withdrawn, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the bench that 2700 such FIRs shall not be withdrawn.
At the outset, SG Mehta told the bench, "There were some misapprehensions in what to do with the FIRs...we have instructions that the government is serious on the commitment..".
SG Mehta informed court that persons with antecedents of rape cases, murder cases, POCSO cases etc would not be spared. Hearing this the bench clarified, "The term criminal antecedents in our previous order is clarified to mean grave and hennas offences."
Last week, the Supreme Court had directed that no coercive action would taken against the protestors involved in the recent protests. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana had also ordered immediate release of minors detained by police across different States except those with criminal background.
CJI Kant had noted that allegations of excesses by the police prima facie made out a case of fair and independent probe. Thus, it proposed to constitute a high-powered committee to ensure a fair and independent probe to these incident of violence. "If we broadly combine the allegations, one is the use of pellet guns, a boy suffered loss of eyesight..use of electric batons and lathis..there is another instance of a woman who is in ICU..then assault on advocates..another incident of assaulting of media persons..violence perpetrated by police personnel in civil dresses..and some instance of molestation of young women..excessive use of pellet guns..", CJI Kant observed.
Supporting the court's stand, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for Centre and Delhi government stated ,"There is one set of petitioners who say the students were beaten brutally..if that is so it cannot be taken lightly and government does not take it lightly..STUDENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTEST..There is another set of police officers who have been beaten and I have the figures..We cannot do anything that may demoralise the police..there may be one truth, another truth and THE TRUTH..which should come before the lordships.."
The Court agreed with SG Mehta's submission that it should first grant the Union government and Delhi Police an opportunity to place their version on record. It said that other States, where the violence took place, may also place their version on record. Accordingly, notice had been issued to the chief secretaries of Delhi, Maharashtra, Bihar, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Court has further directed that all CCTV footage, drone recordings, wireless communications and other records in connection with such protests be preserved.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had agreed to hear all petitions concerning the police “excesses” at the NEET Protests on July 28, 2026. "These things need to be addressed and they require a lot of balancing..," CJI Surya Kant said adding, "Right to protest..peaceful protest is a absolutely guaranteed under our constitutional scheme..that cannot be denied..if there is a peaceful agitation..They have a right to agitate..there should not be impediment or restriction..but if somebody has done something.."
A PIL has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking the constitution of an independent Judicial Commission headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to inquire into the alleged excessive and disproportionate use of force by law enforcement authorities against protesters during the NEET examination paper leak demonstrations in Delhi and connected incidents in Bihar.
The petition filed through AoR Abhigya Kushwah and drawn by Advocate Vishal Tiwari states that it concerns "issues of substantial constitutional and public importance concerning the right of citizens to peacefully express dissent, assemble without arms and seek accountability from the Government." It further submits: "The use of force against an assembly is required to satisfy the requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality, and the conduct of particular individuals cannot automatically justify indiscriminate action against peaceful participants."
Another PIL before the Supreme Court seeks directions for a neutral, time-bound investigation into the alleged attacks on journalists covering the ongoing protests over the alleged NEET examination paper leak at Jantar Mantar in the national capital. The petition contends that the case is not about choosing between the government and the protesters, but concerns the constitutional protection available to journalists performing their professional duties during public demonstrations.
Referring to incidents reported between July 18 and July 23, the petitioner alleges that several journalists covering the demonstrations were assaulted, intimidated or subjected to gendered abuse. Among the incidents cited are the alleged assault on Times Now reporter Dev Kotak, attacks on Shafali Nigam and her cameraperson, the alleged chasing of Jyoti Mishra, the reported targeting of ABP News reporter Varun Bhasin, and allegations of sexual abuse and rape and death threats directed at a woman television reporter.
A letter petition has also been addressed to the Chief Justice of India seeking the Supreme Court's suo motu intervention into the alleged police action against CJP protesters during demonstrations held in the national capital on July 20. The representation seeks an independent judicial inquiry, immediate preservation of evidence, medical protection for the injured, and accountability for officials allegedly responsible for the use of excessive force.
Filed by Advocate Hitendra D. Gandhi, the representation alleges that protesters suffered serious head, facial and bodily injuries during the police action. It further claims that women and girls were assaulted and manhandled, including by male police personnel, and alleges violations of the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal governing arrests and detentions.
Case Title: Narendra Kumar Goswami v. Union of India & Ors.
Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana
Hearing Date: August 3, 2026
https://lawbeat.in/top-stories/neet-paper-leak-protests-supreme-court-to-hear-pils-on-july-28-cji-says-there-should-be-no-restrictions-on-right-to-agitate-1616188