Government Says Genuine Students Will Not Face Criminal Action
The Centre on Monday assured the Supreme Court that it is working to ensure students who took part in protests over the alleged examination paper leak controversy are not subjected to criminal prosecution, while making it clear that those accused of serious offences would continue to face legal action.
The assurance was given during the hearing of petitions related to the violence that broke out during the ‘Sansad Chalo’ march held on July 20.
Centre Says Discussions Underway On FIRs
Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that discussions had already been held with the petitioners regarding FIRs lodged against student protesters.
“We have also spoken to the petitioners. We do not want action against the students. Necessary steps will be taken. However, the criminal elements who have infiltrated among the students cannot be given any relief,” Mehta told the bench.
He also said the government was actively examining the issue of withdrawing or closing criminal cases filed against genuine students.
Petitioners Seek Clarity On Withdrawal Of Cases
Senior advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the petitioners, argued that simply closing the FIRs could become a lengthy legal process because every case would require the public prosecutor to submit a closure report before the court.
She urged the Supreme Court to provide clarity on whether the FIRs should be withdrawn or cancelled, pointing out that one of the FIRs registered in Patna named nearly 5,000 unidentified protesters.
Meanwhile, the Solicitor General sought a short adjournment, stating that the Centre’s response was ready but required additional time before being placed on record.
Supreme Court Wants Separate Treatment For Students And Serious Offenders
The bench led by the Chief Justice of India observed that the investigation should distinguish between peaceful student protesters and individuals accused of serious criminal offences.
“First, the FIRs must be separated—one against students and one against hardened criminals—then you can investigate,” the Chief Justice observed.
The court also clarified that references to “criminal history” should apply only to individuals facing grave offences such as murder or other serious crimes, and not to those involved in minor cases or previous political demonstrations.
Court Examines Police Action And Surveillance Claims
The hearing also focused on allegations of excessive police force during the protests. Petitioners questioned the use of force against demonstrators and sought accountability for officials accused of misconduct.
The Chief Justice said there should be no impression that police personnel accused of excesses would be shielded from scrutiny. The court indicated it was considering whether the matter should be investigated by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or by a committee headed by a retired judge.
Separately, petitioners also raised concerns over the alleged use of facial recognition technology to identify protesters, claiming it violated privacy rights.
Responding to the allegations, the Centre informed the court that identification was carried out through facial recognition as well as field verification. According to the government, information relating to 2,738 individuals had been collected, with criminal cases registered only against those accused of serious offences.
Matter To Be Heard Again On August 18
The Supreme Court scheduled the next hearing for August 18 and directed all parties to file their responses before then.
The court also indicated that the scope and structure of any proposed committee to examine the allegations would be considered during the next hearing.
