Petitioners urgently sought earlier than Chief Justice of India Surya Kant a re-constitution of the “under-equipped” high-powered enquiry committee (HPEC) chaired by former apex courtroom Decide R. Subhash Reddy constituted to probe all points regarding the police crackdown on students protesting NEET-UG paper leaks on July 20.
An utility filed by the petitioners clarified that they weren’t commenting on the private integrity of any members of the HPEC, however they mentioned the “enquiry is required to check the position of individuals occupying the best ranges of the Union Government, the Ministry of Residence Affairs, Delhi Police and the Fast Motion Pressure”.
Editorial | Force of law: On the Delhi police
“This investigation would require enquiry into the position performed by Union Residence Minister, Mr. Amit Shah; officers throughout the Ministry of Residence Affairs; Commissioner of Police Delhi, Mr. Anurag Kumar; Particular Commissioner(s) of Police and Joint Commissioner(s) of Police, Delhi Police; Inspector Normal, Fast Motion Pressure, Seema Dhundia; different high-ranking officers from Fast Motion Pressure. This investigation would require enquiry into the precise position performed by every of the people and officers,” the appliance, talked about by senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, advocates Prashant Bhushan, Neha Rathi, Subhash Chandran, contended.
The applying mentioned the span of the enquiry would cowl the precise instructions handed by them or on earlier than July 20; instructions handed by them to make sure that order is maintained on the protest website; instructions handed by them to make sure that use of drive was proportional; instructions to personnel of Delhi Police and Fast Motion Pressure to not put on uniform or identify tags; disciplinary motion taken in opposition to personnel deployed for the indiscriminate and extreme use of drive, for not carrying uniforms and/or identify tags, for utilizing banned arms and gear, and for outraging modesty of girls.
“When the allegations require scrutiny of such high-ranking officers, the enquiry should be visibly and decisively insulated from govt and institutional affect and any perceived bias,” the appliance mentioned.
Additionally Learn | Protest venue under a web of cameras and facial recognition systems
Chief Justice Surya Kant tried to assuage apprehensions, saying the HPEC can be functioning underneath the attention of the Supreme Courtroom itself.
The applying nonetheless identified that publicly obtainable details about the non-judicial members of the HPEC didn’t disclose specialised expertise in independently investigating allegations of extreme police drive or analyzing the conduct of senior serving govt and police officers.
Apart from Justice Reddy, the committee contains Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana Excessive Courtroom; Justice Shalinder Kaur, former Decide of the Delhi Excessive Courtroom; Rishi Kumar Shukla, former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation; and Dr. L.R. Bishnoi, retired Director Normal of Police, Meghalaya.
The petitioners mentioned info obtainable within the public area present a “lengthy affiliation between members and the manager authorities of the Union of India, together with the Union Residence Minister, highlighting that there’s a cheap apprehension of institutional deference which can prejudice the impartial and neutral probe”.
Solicitor Normal Tushar Mehta, for the federal government, mentioned the fears expressed by the petitioners have been fully unwarranted and with out foundation. He strongly objected to naming people, and mentioned the petitioners have been making an attempt to impose their will on the courtroom. Mr. Sankaranarayanan mentioned the petitioners weren’t doing something of the type, and was merely in search of an early itemizing of the appliance.
The petitioners argued that there was a “actual danger that the enquiry might stay confined to acts of field-level personnel and fail to look at the selections and omissions of senior authorities”.
The applying mentioned the HPEC, constituted in an apex courtroom order on August 18, didn’t embrace any of the options made by the petitioners, together with that it must be headed by a former Chief Justice of India, have a retired lady DGP and a former Lawyer Normal in its ranks.
The petitioners mentioned the HPEC didn’t have officers with investigative expertise or people with a longtime observe file of civil liberties and public curiosity. They mentioned their issues have been restricted to the construction of the HPEC, which in its present kind didn’t possess the “demonstrable independence and proficiency mandatory for the enquiry to be carried out.
“To make sure that the probe is holistic, it’s mandatory that the HPEC should possess, collectively, demonstrated experience in constitutional and civil rights, prison investigation, forensic appreciation, crowd-control and use-of-force protocols, and enquiry into the position of senior functionaries with out worry or favour,” the appliance mentioned.
Printed – August 25, 2026 11:48 am IST
