Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Recast NEET Protest Enquiry Panel, Orders Witness Portal

The Supreme Court has declined to reconstitute the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) examining the police crackdown on the July 20 protests held by the Cockroach Janta Party, holding that the objections raised by petitioners rested on "conjecture and preconceived notions" rather than evidence.

A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed "some measure of disquiet" that aspersions had been cast on the committee even before it began its work. The court's order, dated September 10 and published on Wednesday, records that the petitioners had alleged a conflict of interest within the panel.

The court constituted the HPEC on August 20 to look into allegations, including police excesses on students, during nationwide protests against the NEET-UG paper leaks. The committee is headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy. Its other members are Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court; Justice Shalinder Kaur, former judge of the Delhi High Court; Rishi Kumar Shukla, former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation; and Dr. L.R. Bishnoi, retired Director General of Police, Meghalaya.

The petitioners included students and were represented by senior advocates N. Hariharan and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, and advocates Prashant Bhushan, Vrinda Grover and Neha Rathi. They submitted that they were not alleging bias, but that the committee should also inspire public confidence.

Rejecting the request, the Bench observed: "We are constrained to observe, with some measure of disquiet, that aspersions have been cast upon the HPEC in a manner that is both premature and precipitate. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to effect any alteration in the constitution of the Committee, particularly where the prayer for such reconstitution proceeds on nothing more than conjecture and preconceived notions, articulated even before the HPEC has embarked upon its enquiry."

The court stressed that the committee was set up to assist the Supreme Court itself and was expected to work "with the highest standards of fairness and transparency and with a dispassionate approach". It added: "The HPEC is not created to espouse the causes of one or the other party before us."

On the scope of the inquiry, the court said the immediate focus would be on the use of pellet guns, targeted violence, harassment of women protesters, and excessive violence and destruction of property by both sides.

The Bench also ordered the creation of a separate online portal through which vulnerable witnesses can submit documents and evidence directly to the committee. It directed that their identities and participation be kept confidential. "It goes without saying that utmost confidentiality shall be maintained in respect of any statements given or evidence submitted by such vulnerable witnesses to the HPEC," the order said. The portal will also allow other stakeholders to file material.

Senior advocate Monika Gusain and advocate-on-record C. Solomon were appointed amici curiae, or friends of the court, to assist the Bench and act as independent arbiters among the parties.

The court said "broader constitutional questions" would be taken up for hearing at an "appropriate stage". These include the use of facial recognition surveillance by the police at the Jantar Mantar protest site and the alleged storage of such data with private entities.

The order leaves the committee's composition unchanged while widening the channels through which complainants can approach it. The HPEC's findings will assist the court in deciding the petitions.