Supreme Court Calls for Understanding Amid Protests
The Supreme Court of India emphasized the importance of understanding the grievances of protesting youth rather than allowing situations to escalate into violence. On Wednesday, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, deliberated on a plea filed by retired Air Force officers. They sought action against organizers of the Jantar Mantar protests, which allegedly instigated demonstrations on July 20.
The plea accused the leaders of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) of inciting the protesters. During the session, CJI Kant highlighted the need for a careful approach in handling demonstrations. “We need to tread carefully so that these youngsters do not indulge in violence. The better course is to counsel them and pacify them. The most powerful tool is listening. Listen to them and understand why they are shouting,” he stated.
Background of the Protests
The Supreme Court is examining a series of petitions related to protests that occurred at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, as well as other locations across India, following repeated question paper leaks. These demonstrations began in June, spearheaded by the online group Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which demanded the resignation of the then Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The protests culminated in a “Sansad Chalo” march to the Parliament on July 20, despite a lack of permission from the Delhi Police.
The march led to clashes, with reports of police using disproportionate force, including lathi charges, tear gas, and pellet guns to disperse the student protesters. Subsequently, Minister Pradhan resigned on July 25, leading to the cessation of protests. On July 28, the Supreme Court directed that no coercive measures be taken against protesters and ordered the immediate release of minors detained by police.
Arguments from the Petitioners
The plea by retired Air Force officers emphasized the need for accountability from protest organizers. The petitioners’ counsel argued that while government and police accountability were scrutinized, no action had been taken against the protest organizers for their ongoing provocative public statements. The counsel highlighted that organizers of any public gatherings are usually held responsible for any negligence.
More Read
“Even where there is a congregation, say a religious congregation, if there is an act of negligence, or even if there is a fire in the pandal, the organizers are held responsible,” the counsel argued. They warned that allowing protesters to defy police conditions and proceed towards the parliament could set a dangerous precedent, raising security concerns about potential weapons within the crowd.
Court’s Response and Ongoing Proceedings
CJI Kant asserted that the focus should be on facilitating peaceful protests while maintaining control over potential escalations. “What is important is to promote a peaceful march. If some incident takes place, the police also need to exercise a great deal of restraint to ensure that the situation does not go out of hand,” he said. He also emphasized trusting law enforcement agencies to handle such situations appropriately.
The Supreme Court noted a related petition addressing the protests from an opposing viewpoint. It issued a notice on the plea by the retired Air Force officers and ordered it to be combined with the pending petitions regarding the protests.
