Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Aug 31: The Central government on Monday moved an application in the Supreme Court seeking to quash FIRs filed by the police against protesters in connection with alleged violence during the NEET paper leak protests in Delhi and other States held by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) soon after the apex court refused to halt the CJP’s proposed protest march on September 5 from the India Gate to the Delhi Police’s headquarters.
As the three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant was about to rise, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta made an oral mentioning of a separate application filed by the Centre, urging the apex court to invoke Article 142 of the Constitution regarding the quashing of FIRs linked to the NEET-UG protests. Mr Mehta pushed for a hearing on Tuesday itself and was accepted by the bench.
“I want to move an application with some urgency. This is regarding the protests, of quashing of FIRs… We are requesting invocation of Article 142,” Mr Mehta said. Chief Justice Kant agreed to list the application on September 1. “If parties are reconciling, we have no difficulties,” he said.
The Centre seeks the top court to invoke its extraordinary powers to complete justice under Article 142 of the Constitution to quash FIRs against the protesting students. The Supreme Court will hear the matter on Tuesday.
Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court refused to halt the September 5 protest march announced by the CJP in the national capital, or issue any directions in this regard, saying ensuring proper law and order is maintained was the responsibility of the government and expressing hopes that the authorities would take necessary action if required.
The observations were made by a bench headed by CJI Kant, which said it has no concrete reason to believe that any untoward situation will arise during the proposed march. However, it observed that if anything serious happens, then the petitioner can approach the court immediately.
“We will proceed on the assumption that everyone will behave responsibly, peacefully and in accordance with the law,” the apex court observed, while expressing hopes that all parties would abide by the law. “There is nothing before us at this stage to take a contrary view.”
The petitioner, a retired police officer, had particularly objected to the CJP organising the protest march ahead of the BRICS summit in the national capital on September 12-13.
Days before the BRICS Summit on September 12-13, the CJP has decided to hit the streets again, saying the Centre had not lived up to its assurances, which included the immediate withdrawal of police cases and First Information Reports (FIRs) against students following the earlier National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) protests.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Rizwain Ahmed said to the best of his knowledge, the CJP had not sought permission from either the police or the courts; the decision to march had been announced on social media. National interest would be served better if the CJP postponed the march by another 10 days, to September 15, the petitioner, Rajendra Singh, said.
“International dignitaries are coming to the capital on September 12 and 13. What happened at the AI Summit recently? People stripped and danced… Can’t the CJP wait for 10 days, till September 15, to allow the BRICS Summit to be held unhindered?” the petitioner’s counsel asked.
“There are no compelling circumstances for us to presume that anything wrong would happen. Everybody will conduct themselves in a peaceful, lawful and reasonable manner… It is the responsibility of the Union government and the Delhi Police to maintain law and order. They will say what is illegal or permissive,” the CJI responded.
The court expected both sides, those who wish to march, and the police, to respect and honour the laws of the land, the Chief Justice said. “Everybody should follow the law, the regulatory measures, and respect each other’s rights,” Chief Justice Kant observed orally.
The court instructed Mr Ahmed to provide the Solicitor General’s office with a copy of his application. The Bench said it would tag the application with the main batch of petitions on the NEET-UG protests, scheduled to be listed on September 10. It gave the counsel liberty to mention, in case of any urgency in the interregnum.
Mr Ahmed stridently urged the court to allow him to bring up the application on September 3, ahead of the proposed CJP march. He asked, repeatedly, whether “we can expose the capital to such anarchy at the doors of the BRICS Summit… They have tasted blood.” “History may not forgive leniency in this situation,” the counsel pressed on.
The CJI referred to the lack of an organisational front or an entity to which the court could issue notice in order to hear their side. The CJP is known to be a mass movement. However, the Chief Justice asked Mr Ahmed to persuade the government and the Delhi Police. “They have the duty to maintain law and order,” Chief Justice Kant said.
The government had agreed to withdraw cases against those involved in protests in Delhi and other BJP-ruled states, and provide compensation to families of NEET aspirants who died by suicide following the paper leak. However, the CJP said the government has failed to honour the promises.
Meanwhile, the Delhi Police have said it had not received a request regarding the CJP’s protest march. The CJP, on the other hand, has decided that it would continue with the march as scheduled on September 5.
“We have not received any request letter so far. If we receive any request, we will review it accordingly,” a Delhi Police sources said.