The SC has directed that a plea seeking changes to its five-member committee on the CJP protests be heard alongside the main petitions. The panel is examining allegations of excessive force against protesters as well as claims of injuries and property damage.
BY PC Bureau
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will examine a plea challenging the composition of the committee it appointed to investigate allegations of police excesses during the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP)-led protests at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.
The application was mentioned before a Bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. The Bench directed that the plea seeking reconstitution of the committee be taken up along with the main batch of petitions concerning the alleged police action during the protests.
The development comes days after the Supreme Court, on August 18, appointed a five-member high-powered committee headed by retired Supreme Court judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy to examine allegations of police excesses against protesters as well as counter-allegations involving injuries to police personnel and damage to property.
The other members of the panel are former Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi High Court judge Justice Shalinder Kaur, former CBI Director Rishi Kumar Shukla and former Meghalaya Director General of Police L.R. Bishnoi.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the applicant, sought listing of the application next week.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly opposed the plea and questioned its motivation. Describing it as a “very mischievous application,” he urged the Court to hear it along with the main matter.
“It’s a very mischievous application. Let it be listed with the main matter. The prayer is to reconstitute the committee constituted by Your Lordships and investigating some minister, so-and-so, and they have given names that this judge should be heading it, etc. But this is not a political platform. Something else is happening. I am not saying what the contents of the application are. This is something else which is happening,” he said.
READ: Ram Rahim’s 17 Jail Exits: Privilege, Parole or Political Patronage?
Mehta objected to the application’s references to individuals and its request for changes to the committee, including suggestions regarding the person who should head it. He told the Bench that the Supreme Court “is not a political platform” and suggested that “something else is happening.”
CJI Surya Kant also took exception to the naming of individuals in the application, observing: “We don’t appreciate the mentioning of the names.”
Sankaranarayanan clarified that he was merely seeking listing of the application and would not mention any names either during the hearing or when the matter was formally taken up. He said there was a proper procedure for addressing the concerns and reiterated his request for an early listing.
The Bench directed that the application be heard together with the main batch of petitions dealing with allegations of police excesses and related issues arising from the CJP protests.
