The Supreme Court of India has recently decided against reconstituting the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) tasked with investigating the events surrounding the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) student protests at Jantar Mantar in July. The decision came from a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, who dismissed applications seeking changes to the panel on the grounds that the objections were premature.
Supreme Court’s Stance
The Court expressed concern about the premature criticisms directed at the HPEC, emphasizing that the committee’s purpose is to provide impartial and transparent assistance to the Court. “We are constrained to observe, with some measure of disquiet, that aspersions have been cast upon the HPEC in a manner that is both premature and precipitate,” the Court stated in its order.
Furthermore, the Court clarified that the HPEC is designed to maintain the highest standards of fairness, without favoring any party involved in the case. “It must be understood by one and all that the HPEC has been constituted to assist this Court with the highest standards of fairness and transparency and with a dispassionate approach. The HPEC is not created to espouse the causes of one or the other party before us,” the Bench elaborated.
Committee’s Mandate and Additional Directives
The five-member HPEC was formed on August 18 under the leadership of former Supreme Court judge Justice R Subhash Reddy. The committee’s role is to scrutinize claims of excessive police force against protestors and instances of violence against security personnel. This body will report its findings directly to the Supreme Court while operating under the Court’s supervision.
The Supreme Court also issued supplementary directives for the committee:
More Read
- To prioritize investigating the use of pellet guns, acts of targeted violence, harassment of female protestors, and any excessive destruction of property.
- Broader constitutional issues to be addressed by the Court at a later stage.
- Ensuring the confidentiality of vulnerable witnesses’ identities, statements, and evidence.
- Creation of an online portal for witnesses to submit evidence confidentially.
- Nodal counsel to assist the Court, not to act as intermediaries between the HPEC, the Court, and involved parties.
- Appointment of Senior Advocate Dr. Monika Gusain and Advocate-on-Record C Solomon as amici curiae to serve as independent arbiters.
- The HPEC is to appoint a Member Secretary and submit its initial report as soon as possible.
Protection for a Vulnerable Protestor
The Court addressed serious concerns regarding a 14-year-old protestor who has reportedly faced threats to her and her family’s safety. Acknowledging these threats, the Court has directed the Delhi Police to evaluate the threat and provide the necessary protection to ensure their safety. The police are also instructed to expedite the investigation into those allegedly threatening or harassing the protestor and her family.
The Delhi Police is required to submit a status report on these actions before the next hearing, scheduled for October 9.
