Politics
Supreme Court Signals Article 142 Relief In NEET Protest FIRs
Will the court clear student protest cases without shielding serious offences?
Will the court clear student protest cases without shielding serious offences?
protest FIRs have become a test of how far the state can treat student anger over exam fairness as a criminal matter. What began as a grievance over alleged and irregularities has turned into a dispute over , protest rights, and the Supreme Court’s power to clear away cases under without shielding serious offences.
The latest hearing left the core question centered on versus , with students seeking relief from police cases and authorities insisting that serious offences should remain outside any . The court’s willingness to use Article 142 now sets up the next order as the key moment for whether the FIRs are finally erased and what is left for future student protests.
The Supreme Court indicated it was ready to invoke to against students involved in the , while reserving separate treatment for people with serious criminal backgrounds. That move matters because it turns the case into a test of how far the court can go to undo protest-related prosecutions in the interest of .
With many FIRs still unresolved, political and legal voices urged the to approach the Supreme Court for complete relief under . That argument pushed the dispute from selective withdrawal of cases toward a cleaner, court-led solution for all eligible protest records.
A later clarification recorded in legal reporting said the court meant the phrase "" only for grave and heinous offences, not ordinary student protesters. The bench also permitted states to continue investigating but said no should be taken against students covered by its protection.
The Supreme Court said Delhi and other states could withdraw or close FIRs against student protesters , while excluding cases involving grave crimes. This created a pathway for administrative relief without erasing every case automatically, and it left police and state officials to sort the files individually.
The told the Supreme Court that it would not pursue legal action against students protesting the NEET paper leak. At the same time, it said of others accused of serious offences during the unrest would remain in place, sharpening the split between peaceful protesters and people accused of violence.
The Supreme Court clarified that its earlier reference to "criminal antecedents" applied only to people accused of . The also said states were free to close or withdraw FIRs against protesting students where the law allowed it, narrowing the reach of the earlier restraint order.
After the court’s interim order, state authorities began reviewing their cases against NEET protesters. Reports said governments, including Maharashtra’s, were preparing or directing withdrawals of FIRs in eligible cases, showing that the protest issue had already become a broader police and .
The heard pleas linked to alleged police excess against protesting students and ordered that arrested or detained students without be released. It also directed that no be taken on FIRs against protesters, giving the first major judicial relief in the dispute.
Students and aspirants gathered in Delhi to protest alleged irregularities in the exam and concerns. The demonstration framed the issue as a grievance over exam fairness, not a criminal matter, but it quickly drew police attention because of the large public gathering.