Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant on Friday said media reports claiming that he had refused to list a petition concerning alleged police excesses against student protesters in Delhi were incorrect, clarifying that no petition had ever been filed before the Supreme Court.
Addressing the issue in open court, the Chief Justice said the matter mentioned on July 22 was only a representation and not a formally instituted case. He stated that some media outlets had wrongly reported that he had declined to list the matter, even though the court registry confirmed that no petition had been filed.
According to the Chief Justice, after the reports appeared, he verified the position with the registry and found that not a single paper had been submitted in connection with the matter.
Background Of The Mention
On July 22, a lawyer had mentioned before the Supreme Court that police and other security personnel deployed in Delhi were allegedly using excessive force against student protesters demonstrating at Jantar Mantar. The counsel told the court that video material was available to support the allegations and sought an urgent listing of the matter.
During the mentioning, the lawyer also sought reliefs relating to the conduct of the NEET examination, including a direction that the examination be conducted fairly and the dissolution of the National Testing Agency (NTA), citing repeated paper leak incidents.
Court’s Response During The Mentioning
At the time, the Chief Justice told the lawyer not to waste either the court’s time or his own. After the next matter was called, the counsel continued to press the issue, offering to show videos purportedly depicting police action against the protesters.
The Chief Justice, however, said the court was not interested in viewing the videos during the mentioning.
Those courtroom exchanges were subsequently reported by several media outlets, leading to reports that the Chief Justice had refused to list a petition. On Friday, Justice Surya Kant clarified that such reports were inaccurate because the matter had never been filed as a petition before the Supreme Court.
