Supreme Court Denies Urgent Hearing on Police Action in Student Protest

The Supreme Court of India declined to hear a plea seeking urgent intervention into police action during student protests at Jantar Mantar. The protest, organized by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), focused on the alleged NEET-UG 2026 paper leak, raising significant public concern.

On Wednesday, Chief Justice Surya Kant, head of the three-judge Bench, heard the matter. The petitioner’s counsel sought an expedited hearing, citing the critical nature of the issues raised by students, including examination conduct and necessary reforms in the National Testing Agency (NTA).

In a firm response, Chief Justice Kant remarked, “Don’t waste our time, and don’t waste your time.” This indicates the court’s current focus on pressing matters beyond the students’ grievances.

The attorney emphasized the systemic implications of the alleged paper leak, referencing videos of police actions against protesters. Chief Justice Kant, however, reiterated, “We are not interested in videos; we don’t have time to watch.” His comments reflect the court’s prioritization of its docket over viral media.

This decision closely follows a similar refusal by the Delhi High Court to hear a related plea concerning police actions during the protests. Both courts avoided engaging deeply with the merits of the allegations, pointing instead to procedural protocols requiring careful consideration.

The protests have intensified recently, with calls for the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and the overhaul of the examination system. During the demonstrations, activists reported clashes with police as they attempted to march toward Parliament, raising concerns of excessive force and arbitrary detentions.

The Chief Justice’s comments clarified that the Supreme Court’s refusal to expedite the hearing does not diminish the seriousness of the issues at hand. The court’s remarks focused solely on procedural matters, leaving the substantive allegations unaddressed.

This ongoing situation highlights a larger debate surrounding student rights and the accountability of educational oversight bodies in India. As tensions rise among stakeholders, this case serves as a crucial intersection of law, education, and civic activism in the nation.