SC urged to set up SIT to fix police liability for attack on protesters

The Supreme Court on Tuesday was vehemently urged to set up an SIT headed by a former judge of the court to fix responsibility up to higher echelons of police departments of various states for alleged excesses on students during the nationwide protests against the NEET paper leak.

Stressing the need for a fair and independent probe, the top court, while issuing a slew of interim directions, restrained states from taking any coercive action against protesters in the recent student-led agitation and directed them to release those under 18 on the condition that none should have any criminal antecedents.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana heard a battery of lawyers including Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Centre and the Delhi Police.

Senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Shyam Divan, Vrinda Grover and Prashant Bhushan appeared for petitioners who were alleging police brutalities on the protesters.

For a change, it was the CJI who started narrating specific cases of alleged police atrocities. “One case is the use of pellet guns which harmed a young boy, then use of electric batons which led to life-threatening injuries, then there is the issue of injuring video persons also.

“Then a police officer was assaulted while he was in civil dress... a woman was slapped also by a police officer and some cases of molestation also at the hands of police,” the CJI said. He said there was no need for elaborate arguments. It was a peaceful protest by students raising demands, and it is constitutionally protected, he added.

“The ones who want to prevent it indulge in excess use of force. Then some complaints about police officer families. They say that others with an agenda entered the protest and tried to become co-hosts. So, why should there not be an independent probe into all of it,” the CJI said. Sankaranarayanan then proceeded to argue the case and said the matter concerns the protests that have taken place across the country.

“The incidents are not limited to Delhi or Jantar Mantar alone. They include protests and related incidents in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Agra in Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and several other States,” he said.

There are multiple incidents arising out of these protests and various petitions raise allegations of police excesses, including lathi-charge, use of pellet guns, brutality against students and other actions by the police, he said.

“Legally, there needs to be an order under Section 144 etc. There was nothing for Jantar Mantar. Such cases came during the Ramlila Maidan protest also. Then there were guidelines laid down for how to prevent it,” he said.

The court said the allegations raised in the petitions required a “thorough, independent, fair and transparent” inquiry and observed that responsibility must be fixed if any excesses were committed. “There has to be a completely independent probe. Whoever has committed excess, law will take its course. Probe is meaningless if no responsibility is fixed,” the CJI said.

The court described the protests as “peaceful demonstrations” by students and said it is needed to address the kind of force used against the protesters.

“We need to address what kind of tear gas etc., were used, whether to be allowed... in a democracy, agitations are bound to be there. A time has come when all these principles need to be collated and expanded,” the CJI said.

Sankaranarayanan alleged that the police used force without following established crowd-control protocols and claimed officers acted with impunity.

He urged the court to constitute a special investigation team (SIT) headed by a former Supreme Court judge. He also mentioned the people in civil dress beating protesters and police personnel breaking windows of a car.

“These people behaved with a licence. We want responsibility to be placed up the ladder. Unless this court does that, police think they can get away. SIT may be headed by a former judge of this court. Nothing short of that will send out a message,” he said.

Divan and another senior lawyer Shoeb Alam referred to reports and visual evidence alleging the use of pellet guns, electric batons, tear gas and lathi-charge against unarmed protesters.

Divan also alleged that police personnel in civil clothes participated in assaults and cited incidents involving women, children and journalists.

“There are reports of electric shock weapons being used on protesters. A young protester yelped in pain... electrical shields (were) also used in the national capital.

“Excessive force through lathi-charge and tear gas. There is a protocol, but it was breached apparently,” he said.

The court said democratic societies would inevitably witness agitations and protests, and stressed the need to revisit and strengthen existing guidelines governing police action during demonstrations.

Justice Bagchi said that police forces should be equipped with adequate protective gear, saying it would reduce the need for immediate use of force.

Alam alleged that a policeman used an AK-47 on protesters and now the state police said that they have suspended him.

“Only a former CJI should be the one to head this SIT. Nothing short of that,” Sankaranarayanan said.

The CJI hinted that a high-powered committee may be set up to look at it from all India levels.

Vrinda Grover said, “I have never seen such an amount of police officers in my life. How did that truck pass so many police barricades?”