On CJP protest police excesses, the Supreme Court has told the Justice R Subhash Reddy-led High-Powered Enquiry Committee to give its first fact-finding report within a month, and to consider material filed by petitioners on behalf of victims as well.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC), set up to examine the violence during the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP)-led student protests at Jantar Mantar and elsewhere in July, to submit its first report within one month, and allowed counsel for the petitioners to forward their material, including videos, directly to the panel [In Re: Student Protests Against Examination Paper Leaks (case title to be verified)].
The directions were issued on November 5, 2026 by a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, which is hearing a batch of petitions on alleged police brutality during the protests and on alleged assaults on police personnel by protesters.
What the Court directed
The Bench said the committee should not wait indefinitely, and should call for responses on the material it already has.
“We have clarified that information and material submitted by parties, including material submitted on behalf of victims, will be examined and considered. There are two issues which have been prioritised, besides other issues referred to the committee.”
The committee may give an interim report on the two priority issues. On disclosure, the Bench said:
“We would like the committee to start submitting its fact-finding reports. Unless there is something extraordinary requiring confidentiality, we would ordinarily like the relevant contents of those reports to be shared.”
The committee and its mandate
The five-member HPEC, chaired by former Supreme Court judge Justice R Subhash Reddy, was constituted on August 18. It is examining allegations of excessive police force against protesters and of violence against security personnel. The Court had asked it to first look at the use of pellet guns, targeted violence and harassment of women protesters, and excessive violence and destruction of property on either side.
The Court recorded that the committee held a sitting on October 26 after publicity in print and electronic media and notices to complainants, but only one complainant appeared, on October 29, and filed an affidavit. Some police personnel have also appeared. Few complaints have come in on the portal launched three weeks ago.
The petitioners’ submissions
Senior Advocate N Hariharan said it was not known what progress the committee had made, or whether any departmental inquiry or case had been registered over the alleged brutality, and sought a copy of the report. Advocate Vrinda Grover said representations had been made before and after the portal’s launch, but no FIR had been registered on them. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said the petitions already contain detailed allegations, and the committee appeared to be considering only accounts sent directly by victims.
CJI Kant said the representations could be placed on record and treated as complaints, and asked counsel to encourage complainants to come forward, noting that the victims themselves had not appeared before the panel.
The Centre’s response and the sealed-cover question
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged that the report be considered with the help of the amicus and the committee so that its sanctity is maintained, and said police should not be demoralised through demands for suspension or transfer where they use reasonable force against an unlawful assembly. He said the government would act if the committee reached a conclusion.
CJI Kant said the Court would examine the report itself and then frame issues for the parties, adding that this was not a sealed-cover procedure adopted by a government agency but a committee constituted by the Court. Justice Bagchi clarified that setting up the committee did not prevent police authorities from acting against any officer found to have committed a transgression.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Told Complaints Portal For July Student Protests Probe Is Ready For Launch
Background
The protests began in June on the CJP’s call against repeated question paper leaks in NEET and other examinations, with demands for the resignation of then Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who resigned on July 25, after which the protests were called off. The petitions concern the protests at Jantar Mantar and in Bihar and other parts of the country. The allegations on both sides, against police personnel and against protesters, are yet to be examined by the committee, and the Court has made no finding on them.
Why the hearing matters
The Court has moved the inquiry from setting up a process to producing findings, with a one-month deadline. Its clarification that petitioners’ material can go to the panel directly addresses the low turnout of complainants, while its signal that reports will ordinarily be shared keeps the process open. At the same time, the Bench has kept room for both concerns raised before it: accountability for any excess by police, and protection for officers who used lawful force. The matter will next be heard on December 2.
Case Title: In Re: Student Protests Against Examination Paper Leaks (case title to be verified)
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: November 5, 2026
Appearances: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta; Senior Advocates N Hariharan and Gopal Sankaranarayanan; Advocate Vrinda Grover
Next Date: December 2, 2026