Supreme Court Orders Inquiry Report on Police Conduct During Protests

The Supreme Court of India has directed the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) to submit its initial report regarding police conduct during protests that occurred in July. These protests were organised by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) at Jantar Mantar, and the Court has emphasised the need for rapid reporting on significant issues.

A Bench consisting of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi instructed the Committee to explore submissions made by victims in relation to the protests. The Court stated, "We have clarified that information and material submitted by parties, including material submitted on behalf of victims, will be examined and considered."

The HPEC was established on August 18 and is chaired by former Supreme Court Justice R Subhash Reddy. The committee's mandate includes assessing allegations of excessive force employed by police during the protests, attacks on security personnel, and issues surrounding the treatment of female protestors.

Senior Advocate N Hariharan raised concerns regarding the progress of the inquiry, asserting that the principal focus should be on investigating the alleged brutality that transpired during the protests. "Our petition concerns the brutalities allegedly committed during the protests. That is the principal issue requiring consideration," he stated.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned that the report might be confidential and suggested it should be considered with the involvement of the committee and the amicus. In contrast, Hariharan contended that the petitioners should have access to the report, as past practices have shown disapproval of submitting reports in sealed envelopes.

CJI Kant indicated that the Court intends to examine the report independently before deciding on any issues that may require input from the petitioners. The Court also addressed the lack of complaints received through the designated portal for victims, highlighting that only a handful of individuals had come forward to file grievances.

"Despite efforts made by the panel, only a few complaints were received on the designated portal launched three weeks ago," CJI Kant added.

The committee has also begun the examination of complaints filed thus far, and the process for examining additional submissions is forthcoming. Advocate Vrinda Grover noted that no first information report (FIR) had been registered concerning the complaints presented by the victims.

The Supreme Court stated that all representations provided could be formally recognised as complaints. The committee is encouraged to progress with investigations to ensure a thorough consideration of the allegations.

In light of ongoing discussions, the Court has urged petitioners to encourage victims to present their testimonies directly to the committee and has indicated openness to revisiting procedural formats to ensure efficient handling of evidence.