Police Brutality: Supreme Court

Introduction

The Supreme Court on Thursday said that very few complaints were received directly on the online portal of the High Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) inquiring into allegations of police brutality and sexual abuse of women during the July 20 violence sparked by demonstrations against the NEET-UG 2026 question paper leaks.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, after perusing an Action Taken Report (ATR) submitted by the HPEC on October 31, said that while the HPEC portal hardly saw any response, no complaints were received via email, post, or through physical delivery to the HPEC offices.

Background

The HPEC, chaired by former apex court judge, Justice R. Subhash Reddy, was constituted in August by the Supreme Court. It had launched its online portal three weeks ago in mid-October.

The ATR said the lack of complaints from the protesters was despite repeated public notices that the grievances would be maintained confidentially, and would only be accessible to the Chairperson and HPEC members.

Portal Features

The portal had separate windows for affected protesters and police personnel. The complaints could also be filed anonymously, without disclosing names, phone numbers, addresses or Aadhaar details.

Court Directions

The Bench said that under such circumstances, and in light of the ATR, the petitioners before the apex court could forward whatever material, including video clips, they had of the violence to the HPEC for its consideration.

“The materials or information forwarded by the parties may be examined by the HPEC,” the Court ordered.

The Court asked the HPEC not to wait “indefinitely” for material to begin its assigned task of inquiring into allegations. The Bench said the committee could look into available complaints and progress as more trickle in.

Submission by Advocate Vrinda Grover

Advocate Vrinda Grover submitted that the police authorities had not shared any information, evidence or material with the HPEC as yet.

“If pellet guns were fired, who authorised it… what is the order… where is the ammunition register... The HPEC report does not seem to show as if the authorities have provided any such material. Why have they not placed the records before the HPEC,” Ms. Grover asked.

Court Response

The Chief Justice said the petitions seeking such information should be considered by the HPEC and the panel must record responses to it from the authorities without any further delay.

“The Committee need not wait indefinitely. Whatever material comes, whosoever needs to respond, let them give responses. We would like the Committee to now start giving fact-finding reports,” Chief Justice recorded in the order.

Senior Advocate N. Hariharan’s Submission

Senior advocate N. Hariharan said legal questions such as whether “monitoring or surveillance of protesters, if undertaken, was consistent with their constitutional rights to privacy and free assembly” should not be left to the Committee.

“The Court itself has to look into these questions. The Committee cannot look into such substantial issues affecting fundamental rights,” he said.

Read also: Karnataka High Court Proceedings

Next Steps

The Court asked the HPEC to submit its first fact-finding report within a month.

The Court said the relevant findings of the HPEC should ordinarily be shared with all the parties unless circumstances require confidentiality.

The matter would be taken up again in December.

July 20 Protests

On July 20, police cracked down on a protest called by the Cockroach Janta Party in Delhi, leaving several people injured.

• 3,000 security personnel were deployed during the protests.
• An Internet shutdown was also imposed during the protests.
• Multiple layers of barricades were set up to prevent protesters from reaching Parliament.

Implications for Readers in India

The Supreme Court’s decision to ask the HPEC to submit its first fact-finding report within a month is a significant step towards ensuring accountability for the alleged police brutality and sexual abuse during the July 20 protests.

Readers in India should be aware of their rights and the measures being taken to protect them. The fact that the HPEC portal allows for anonymous complaints is a crucial aspect, as it enables victims to come forward without fear of retribution.

What to Watch Next

As the HPEC begins its investigation, readers should watch for updates on the fact-finding report and the Court’s response to the petitions seeking information on the alleged police brutality and sexual abuse.

The Supreme Court’s decision to take up the matter again in December will be crucial in determining the next steps in the investigation and the potential consequences for those responsible for the alleged human rights violations.

Expert Perspective

Experts say that the Supreme Court’s decision is a positive step towards ensuring accountability, but more needs to be done to address the systemic issues that led to the alleged police brutality and sexual abuse.

“The Court’s decision is a welcome move, but it is essential to address the root causes of the problem, including the lack of training and accountability within the police force,” said a human rights expert.

Timeline of Events

The following is a timeline of the key events surrounding the July 20 protests and the subsequent investigation:

• July 20: Police crack down on protests in Delhi, leaving several people injured.
• August: The Supreme Court constitutes the HPEC to investigate allegations of police brutality and sexual abuse.
• October: The HPEC launches its online portal for receiving complaints.
• October 31: The HPEC submits its ATR to the Supreme Court.
• November 5: The Supreme Court asks the HPEC to submit its first fact-finding report within a month.
• December: The Supreme Court will take up the matter again to review the progress of the investigation.