A DCP-rank officer will head the SIT probe into alleged assault on lawyers who protested against the Bar Council of India Chairman, as the Supreme Court declined a CBI investigation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: Declining a CBI probe, the Supreme Court on Monday directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to ensure that a complaint over the alleged assault on lawyers who were protesting against Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra is properly investigated by a team headed by an officer of the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police [Petitioner Advocates v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, and Others].
The order of October 12, 2026 came from a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, on a petition argued by Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the lawyers.
From the Bench
Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the High Court’s remarks would not colour the inquiry:
“The investigation will be without being influenced by the observations of the High Court.”
The Chief Justice also said that “beating is certainly a cognizable offence” and that there was no need for the Court to observe otherwise. During the hearing, Justice Bagchi remarked that the petitioners seemed more interested in prosecuting the BCI Chairman than the assailants, and said that the only question was one of methodology and that the investigation should go on.
What the Court ordered
The Court directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to ensure that the August 22 complaint is appropriately investigated, and recorded that:
“the investigation shall be headed by a fairly senior officer of the rank of Deputy Commissioner.”
The Bench rejected a CBI probe and indicated that an SIT must consist of authorised police officers, with retired officers only assisting. A report is to go to the jurisdictional Magistrate, and the petitioners may return to the Supreme Court if they are dissatisfied with the investigation. The Court also said the petitioners may pursue their remedy before the Magistrate under the BNSS, and that it could ensure that the CCTV footage is made available to them.
How the petition reached the Court
The petitioners allege that lawyers who protested outside the BCI office in August 2026, demanding the resignation of the BCI Chairman, were attacked in the early hours by a group of 20 to 30 persons. A complaint dated August 22 was filed with the SHO of the IP Estate police station, alleging offences including unlawful assembly, rioting, trespass, criminal intimidation and conspiracy, and seeking preservation of CCTV footage. Delhi Police did not register an FIR.
The lawyers moved the Delhi High Court for a CBI or other independent probe. By order of September 21, the High Court dismissed the petition, observing that the complaint did not disclose a cognizable offence and that the petitioners had not first approached the DCP or a Magistrate. Mr. Bhushan told the Supreme Court that no FIR had been registered even after about two months. He alleged that the BCI Chairman knew the attackers and encouraged them, and argued that the BCI should have initiated professional misconduct action against them. These are the petitioners’ allegations. They are untested, and the Court has expressed no view on their merits.
What changes
The order keeps the investigation with Delhi Police but raises its level, placing it under a DCP-rank officer and reporting to the Magistrate, while refusing the petitioners’ request to hand it to the CBI. It also directs that the inquiry proceed uninfluenced by the High Court’s earlier observations that no cognizable offence was disclosed.
No finding has been made on who attacked the protesters or on the allegations against the BCI Chairman. Those questions remain for the investigation, and anyone named is presumed innocent.
Case Title: Petitioner Advocates v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, and Others (case number not available)
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, Supreme Court of India
Date of Order: October 12, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the petitioners