CJI Kant says no case filed on ‘police violence’ during CJP’s Parliamentary march

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Monday (July 20, 2026) two fresh petitions alleging police excesses during the July 20 crackdown on student protesters in the state capital.

The development came hours after Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant clarified in open court on Friday that “no petition was filed earlier” in the matter and slammed “reckless” reports suggesting 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 photos documenting alleged police brutality during the crackdown. She said the material would form the basis of court proceedings to register an FIR against the police personnel allegedly responsible for the violence.

Meanwhile, after The Hindu reported that two unarmed protesters were hit by bullets allegedly fired by Rapid Response Force (RAF) personnel, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) on Friday (July 24) said it was “verifying media reports”. A CRPF official said that no action has been taken yet as the truth is still being ascertained.

The Delhi Police had earlier denied using firearms against the protesters. During the July 20 operation, the RAF, a specialized counter-insurgency unit, was deployed under the overall control of the Delhi Police. One of the injured protesters, 19-year-old Sahil Lochab, risks losing sight in his right eye after a bullet pierced his pupil. Congress chief Rahul Gandhi met him on Friday.

Earlier in the day, during the said hours when lawyers alert the court on matters requiring urgent listing, the Chief Justice clarified that the high court on Wednesday (July 22, 2026) had only received a representation from the lawyer and that no petition had been filed. The comments came two days after the court refused to initiate suo motu proceedings on advocate Narendra Mishra’s oral plea to take cognizance of alleged police brutality during the July 20 parliamentary march organized by the CJP.

“Till morning, 10 am, I was trying to find out; no case was filed… Not a single page was filed in the Supreme Court. It was one representation… How can I treat the representation as a writ petition? And people will start reporting it recklessly,” the chief justice observed while presiding over a bench that also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana.

The chief justice expressed concern over the reporting, saying that sections of the media had engaged in “reckless” reporting. “In the last two days, a totally false statement was made that a case was filed, and the media is absolutely absolved of all responsibility, it recklessly falsely reported that the Chief Justice had refused to list the case,” he said.

‘excessive force’

Later in the afternoon, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned before the Bench that since then two petitions have been formally instituted and allotted diary numbers. Seeking their emergency list, he said police personnel continued to use “excessive force” against student protesters.

“There are two petitions dealing with the violence that took place across the country during the student protests. We have the numbers of the newspapers, properly drafted petitions. The states are parties. The police are using disproportionate force against the children. It just continues unabated,” Bench said.

Mr. Sankaranarayanan urged the court to take immediate action, saying that the alleged police violence continues every day. “This happens daily… Some checks are necessary. The court stands between us and the police,” he added. After agreeing to hear the matter on Monday (July 27, 2026), the chief justice said: “Let it be brought up. We will deal with it.”

Epistolary jurisdiction

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 that allegedly show police personnel attacking unarmed protesters. He also offered to submit the videos to the court. However, the Chief Justice led by the Bench rejected the request, with the Chief Justice telling the lawyer not to “waste” the court’s time. “We are not interested in the videos. We don’t have time to watch them,” the CJI said.

Attempts to invoke the Supreme Court’s writ jurisdiction date back to the late 1970s, when the Court began relaxing traditional standing rules and allowing public-spirited individuals to approach constitutional courts on behalf of aggrieved persons to protect fundamental rights and uphold the rule of law. This led to the development of a judicial jurisdiction in which informal letters and postcards addressed to judges were treated as written proposals to improve access to justice for marginalized persons who had little or no meaningful access to the courts.

One of the earliest cases was Sunil Batra v Delhi Government (1979) where the court treated a prisoner’s letter about custodial torture as a petition for injunction and issued directions to curb such practices.

Against plainclothes personnel

One of the petitions before the apex court seeks directions to regulate police action during public protests, including a ban on deployment of plainclothes personnel for crowd control duties, and directions governing the exercise of powers under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which empowers the Executive Magistrate to act where there is a “demand for action or sufficient speed” and where there is sufficient speed.

“The current generation of youth is experiencing scarcity, unemployment, expensive education, loneliness and a sense of alienation and betrayal by their own government in their own country (violating Article 16). They present their legitimate demands to the government in a peaceful manner (Article 19). But in return, they are lathi-charged, peacefully protesting, violating machine guns and inciting female students2,” the petition states.

The petition further states that at least 60 protesters were injured during the police action, and claims that the allegations warrant an independent and impartial investigation.

Delhi HC to hear in September.

The Delhi High Court is also hearing a number of petitions related to alleged police violence during the July 20 protests. On Wednesday, it asked the Union government and the Delhi Police to respond to pleas about the alleged excessive use of force against students and other protesters during the parliamentary march. The court also ordered the authorities to preserve all relevant material, including CCTV and video footage, relating to the protest and subsequent police action. The next hearing is scheduled for September 11.

During the hearing, Mr. Sankaranarayanan, appearing for petitioner Umesh Kumar, said that he had personally examined about 130 videos of the July 20 protest and that they showed widespread use of force by police personnel.

Internet suspension

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 underway. The petition followed the Union government’s directive to telecom service providers on Thursday to suspend internet services in parts of central Delhi from 4 pm to 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.

However, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a petition seeking a National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe into the protests led by the CJP. A bench headed by Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya said it was beyond the court’s jurisdiction to direct the NIA investigation. “You ask us to form a view that if it is a fit case… This work has been entrusted to the Central Government,” the Bench observed orally.

Earlier, Additional Assistant Commissioner of Police (ADCP) Sandeep Lamba, who was seen on video slapping a woman on July 20, was removed from his duties related to the protests around Jantar Mantar and sent to Northeast Delhi, his original post.

Another video showed a Delhi Police officer in uniform with “three stars” on his shoulder, suggesting he is an inspector, allegedly harassing a woman with a wooden stick. In the video, another uniformed official, believed to be a senior constable, wearing a flak jacket and a cloth covering his face, is seen beating a young woman with a baton as he leaves the melee.

Meanwhile, Union Ministers JP Nadda and Jitendra Singh on Friday (July 24, 2026) met the CJP delegation at the Constitution Club in Delhi for the second round of talks aimed at resolving the ongoing protests. However, the CJP insists that its demand for the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan remains unchanged.