The Supreme Court has done well to direct that no coercive action should be initiated against protesters involved in the recent student agitation led by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Delhi’s Jantar Mantar and other states. A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana ordered the immediate release of minors detained by the police. The Court held that the violence connected to the protests warranted a “thorough, fair and impartial” investigation. The order came on multiple petitions alleging that the police used excessive force during the Sansad Chalo demonstration and other protests on July 20. It also took note of allegations regarding the use of pellet guns and electric batons, the assault on women protesters and media personnel, and claims that policemen in civilian clothes participated in the violence.

Excesses brought to the apex court’s attention have continued in other forms even after the police action. The alleged deployment of facial recognition technologies to identify protesters and place them under surveillance has triggered widespread concern. Apart from the hundreds of FIRs filed during the protests, fresh FIRs were reportedly registered later. Those who served food to the protesters have also faced harassment. It is not just the violence resorted to by the police against the protesters that violates the constitutional right to protest. The closure of metro stations and the shutting down of mobile internet are state actions that prevent people from exercising their right.

These actions also deny the rights of thousands of others not connected to the protests. Courts and other bodies should factor in these breaches, too, when they consider appeals against excessive state action. CJP leaders have accused the Union government of not honouring the assurances made before the protest was called off. The party has warned of a fresh round of agitation if the government fails to correct its position.

The CJI made a welcome reiteration on Monday that the right to peacefully protest is absolutely guaranteed under the Constitution and that police excesses were unacceptable. Very often, statements and decisions are delayed when they are most needed, with their principles emphasised only after the event in question. Notably, the Supreme Court last week refused an urgent hearing regarding allegations of police excesses. Although the CJI provided reasons for declining the plea, his explanation failed to convince critics, leaving doubts about the soundness of the Court’s position, taken at a critical time. (Source: DH)