The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Monday (July 20, 2026) two freshly instituted petitions alleging police excesses during the July 20 crackdown on student protesters in the national capital.
The development came hours after Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant clarified in open court on Friday that “no petition” had previously been filed on the issue and criticised “reckless” reports suggesting that the court had refused to list such a matter.
The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which is spearheading the protests, announced on Friday (July 24) that it would launch a website to archive videos and photographs documenting alleged police brutality during the crackdown. It said the material would form the basis of legal proceedings seeking the registration of FIRs against the police personnel allegedly responsible for the violence.
Meanwhile, after The Hindu reported that two unarmed protesters were struck by pellets allegedly fired by Rapid Action Force (RAF) personnel, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) said on Friday (July 24) that it was “verifying the media reports”. A CRPF official said no action has been taken so far, as the veracity is still being ascertained.
Earlier, the Delhi Police had denied using pellet guns against the protesters. The RAF, a specialised anti-riot force, had been deployed under the overall control of the Delhi Police during the July 20 operation. One of the injured protesters, 19-year-old Sahil Lochab, risks losing vision in his right eye after a pellet pierced his pupil. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi met him on Friday.
Earlier in the day, during mentioning hours, when lawyers draw the court’s attention to matters requiring urgent listing, the Chief Justice clarified that the top court had received only a representation from a lawyer on Wednesday (July 22, 2026) and that no petition had been instituted. The observations came two days after the court declined to initiate suo motu proceedings on an oral request made by advocate Narendra Mishra to take cognisance of the alleged police brutality during the July 20 Parliament march organised by the CJP.
“Till morning, 10 a.m., I tried to find out; no case had been filed... Not a single page has been filed in the Supreme Court. It was one representation... How can I treat the representation as a writ petition? And people start recklessly reporting this,” the Chief Justice remarked while presiding over a Bench also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana.
Expressing concern over the reportage, the Chief Justice said sections of the media had engaged in “reckless” reporting. “In the last two days, a completely false statement was made that a matter was filed, and the media is absolutely free from all responsibility, recklessly falsely reporting that the Chief Justice refused to list the matter,” he said.
Later in the afternoon, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned before the Bench that two petitions had since been formally instituted and assigned diary numbers. Seeking their urgent listing, he submitted that police personnel were continuing to use “excessive force” against student protesters.
“There are two petitions dealing with the violence that took place across the country during the students’ protests. We have diary numbers, properly constituted petitions. The States are parties. Police are using excessive force against children. It is just going on unabated,” he told the Bench.
Mr. Sankaranarayanan urged the court to intervene immediately, saying the alleged police violence was continuing daily. “This is happening daily... Some controls are necessary. The court stands between us and the police,” he submitted. Agreeing to hear the matter on Monday (July 27, 2026), the Chief Justice said, “Let it be listed. We will entertain it.”
During the hearing on Wednesday (July 22, 2026), Mr. Mishra referred to a letter petition addressed to the Chief Justice of India and urged the court to examine videos purportedly showing police personnel assaulting unarmed protesters. He had also offered to place the videos before the court. However, the Chief Justice-led Bench declined the request, with the Chief Justice telling the lawyer not to “waste” the court’s time. “We are not interested in videos. We don’t have time to watch them,” the CJI had said.
Attempts to invoke the top court’s jurisdiction through letters date back to the late 1970s, when the court began relaxing the traditional rules of locus standi, allowing public-spirited individuals to approach the constitutional courts on behalf of aggrieved persons to protect fundamental rights and uphold the rule of law. This led to the evolution of the court’s epistolary jurisdiction, under which informal letters and postcards addressed to judges were treated as writ petitions with the objective of improving access to justice for the marginalised who had little or no meaningful access to the courts.
One of the earliest instances was Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1979), where the court treated a prisoner’s letter alleging custodial torture as a writ petition and issued directions to curb such practices.
One of the petitions before the top court seeks directions to regulate police action during public protests, including a prohibition on the deployment of plainclothes personnel for crowd-control duties, and guidelines governing the exercise of powers under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) that empowers a Executive Magistrate to act where “there is sufficient ground for proceeding under this section and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable”.
“The current generation of youth is experiencing deprivation, unemployment, expensive education, loneliness, and a sense of alienation and betrayal by their own government within their own country (violating Article 16). They are presenting their legitimate demands to the government in a peaceful manner (Article 19). However, in return, they are receiving lathi charges, tear gas, pellet guns, and outraging the modesty of female students peacefully protesting (violating Article 21),” the petition states.
The petition further submits that at least 60 protesters were injured during the police action, and contends that the allegations warrant an independent and impartial inquiry.
The Delhi High Court is also hearing a batch of petitions concerning the alleged police violence during the July 20 protests. On Wednesday, it sought responses from the Union government and the Delhi Police on pleas alleging excessive use of force against students and other protesters during the Parliament march. The court also directed the authorities to preserve all relevant material, including CCTV footage and video recordings, relating to the protest and the subsequent police action. The matter is scheduled to be heard next on September 11.
During the hearing, Mr. Sankaranarayanan, appearing for petitioner Umesh Kumar, submitted that he had personally examined around 130 videos of the July 20 protest, and that they showed widespread use of force by police personnel.
On Friday, the High Court agreed to hear a separate petition challenging the suspension of Internet services within a 1.5-km radius of Jantar Mantar, where the protests are under way. The petition followed the Union government’s direction to telecom service providers on Thursday to suspend Internet services in parts of Central Delhi from 4 p.m. until midnight under the Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024. The government said the measure was necessary in the interest of public safety and to avert a public emergency.
The High Court, however, declined to entertain a petition seeking a National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe into the CJP-led protests. A Bench headed by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya said it was beyond the court’s jurisdiction to direct an NIA probe. “You are asking us to form an opinion that if this is a fit case... This job has been entrusted to the Central government,” the Bench orally observed.
Earlier, Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (ADCP) Sandeep Lamba, who was seen in a video slapping a woman on July 20, was removed from protest-related duties around Jantar Mantar and sent to north-east Delhi, his original place of posting.
Another video showed a Delhi Police official in uniform, with “three stars” on his shoulder, suggesting he is an Inspector, allegedly molesting a woman with a wooden stick. In the video, another uniformed official, probably a head constable, wearing a bulletproof jacket and concealing his face with a cloth, is seen hitting a young woman with a baton as she walks away from the melee.
Meanwhile, Union Ministers J.P. Nadda and Jitendra Singh met a CJP delegation at the Constitution Club in Delhi on Friday (July 24, 2026) for a second round of talks aimed at resolving the ongoing protests. The CJP, has, however, maintained that its demand for Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation remains unchanged.
Published - July 24, 2026 01:52 pm IST