No evidence of violence in Jantar Mantar student protest, notes Supreme Court

The Supreme Court stated on Thursday that the committee investigating the violence and alleged police atrocities during the student protest at Jantar Mantar on July 20 has received very few complaints so far. Due to the lack of sufficient material, the inquiry committee has not yet been able to reach any definitive conclusion.

A High Powered Inquiry Committee (HPEC), headed by retired judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy, has been constituted to investigate the case. The committee informed the court that despite the arrangement of an online portal and email for receiving complaints, very few people have registered their grievances. The committee stated that in a meeting held on October 29, only one complainant appeared with an affidavit.

According to a report by Dainik Bhaskar, the committee had published public notices in 149 newspapers across the country to invite complaints. An online portal was launched on October 13, where providing a name, Aadhaar number, or other identification was not mandatory for the complainant. Access to this portal is restricted to the committee's chairman and concerned officials. Additionally, facilities to submit complaints via email, post, and in person at the office were provided. A press release was issued on October 17 and complaints were sought again on October 21; however, very few complaints arrived on the portal and none were received via email or post.

On the other hand, Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the petitioners, argued that she had handed over complaints to the committee even before the portal was launched and had submitted one more complaint as per the prescribed procedure after the portal became operational. She further stated that not a single FIR has been registered in the cases of violence. Ms. Grover questioned who had authorized the use of pellet guns against the protesters and contended that the central government has provided no information regarding this in the committee's report. In this context, it was mentioned that Rahul Gandhi had held a press conference with a student named Sahil, who was injured in the pellet gun attack on July 20, alleging that the student lost his eyesight due to the pellet gun.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan suggested that videos and other materials filed in the Supreme Court could be sent to the committee so that every victim would not have to appear separately. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta raised an objection to this. He stated that third parties filing Public Interest Litigations could make false claims about the number of victims. He gave an example where someone might claim 50 victims, while in reality, there are only 5.

CJI Surya Kant told the petitioners to encourage the victims to present their case before the committee. He noted that there is a difference between the material submitted by the petitioners and the material that has reached the committee. The court has ordered the petitioners to send all relevant material in their possession, including copies of petitions, affidavits, and video clips filed in the Supreme Court, to the committee. The court clarified that the HPEC will consider the material sent by the victims and the committee must submit interim reports at regular intervals after obtaining responses from the concerned parties.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi clarified that the formation of the committee does not prevent police officers or their seniors from taking action. If they feel that any police personnel deployed at the scene acted wrongly, they can take action against them. According to a report by The Times of India, the Supreme Court has given the panel one month to file its report.

The entire controversy began with the clashes that occurred during the march towards Parliament on July 20.