The Supreme Court on September 1 quashed FIRs registered against students who participated in the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led protests between July 20 and 25, after the Centre and governments of Maharashtra, Assam, West Bengal and Bihar moved applications seeking withdrawal of the cases. The court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution, which gives it extraordinary powers to ensure “complete justice”, and directed that similar FIRs relating to the protests in other states and Union Territories should not be pursued.
The order came after the Centre assured the court that no fresh FIRs would be registered over the same protest-related incidents. However, the relief does not extend to 2,873 people whom Delhi Police identified as having serious criminal antecedents; the police has been permitted to pursue a separate FIR concerning their alleged involvement in violence or property damage. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, CJP spokesperson Saurav Das said the group had decided to withdraw its proposed September 5 protest march in Delhi.
Court Ends Protest Cases
The Supreme Court’s order brings significant relief to students who faced criminal proceedings following the CJP protests, which centred on concerns over the NEET-UG paper leak and wider issues in the education system. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, considered applications filed by the Centre and four state governments seeking to bring the cases to an end.
The Centre had approached the court after CJP announced another protest march for September 5, alleging that earlier assurances regarding the withdrawal of cases had not been honoured. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the Centre and the states had moved applications to fulfil the commitment made to protesters on July 25. The Centre also assured that no further FIRs would be registered in connection with incidents covered by the proceedings.
The court extended the relief beyond the states that had formally approached it, directing that FIRs relating to the July 20–25 student protests elsewhere in the country should not be pursued or investigated and should be treated as closed. The order was framed around the future of students who had participated in the demonstrations in good faith.
2,873 People Excluded
The order, however, does not amount to a blanket immunity for everyone who was present during the protests. Delhi Police has been allowed to pursue a separate case concerning 2,873 individuals whom it says have serious criminal antecedents and were prima facie present at the protest site. The police had earlier sought permission to replace 13 FIRs registered between July 20 and 25 with a single, focused FIR to investigate the alleged involvement of these individuals in offences including bodily harm and destruction of property.
The development follows a series of Supreme Court interventions concerning the student protests. On July 28, the court had directed states to release detained students below 18 and those without criminal antecedents, while also restricting coercive action against eligible protesters. On August 3, it clarified that states could close or withdraw cases against student protesters, provided they followed the law.
The latest ruling also changes the immediate course of the CJP’s planned September 5 mobilisation. CJP spokesperson Saurav Das told the court that, following the Centre’s assurance and the court’s order, the organisation would withdraw its call for the march. Chief Justice Surya Kant responded positively to the decision, saying, “If both sides show good gestures, everything can be resolved.”
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The Supreme Court’s decision highlights the importance of finding a balance between accountability and compassion when young people become involved in large-scale protests. Peaceful dissent is an essential part of a democracy, and students raising concerns about examinations, education and their future should be able to make their voices heard without living under the shadow of criminal proceedings indefinitely.
At the same time, allegations of violence, injury or destruction of property must be investigated fairly, based on individual responsibility rather than collective punishment. The decision to resolve the dispute through assurances, judicial oversight and the withdrawal of the proposed protest shows how dialogue can sometimes achieve what confrontation cannot.
As the CJI observed, “If both sides show good gestures, everything can be resolved.” Can this moment become an example of how governments, protesters and institutions can choose dialogue and accountability over prolonged confrontation?
Also Read: Bihar, Jharkhand Sign Pact To End 25-Year Sone River Water Dispute: Here’s What It Means
#BREAKING: The Supreme Court ordered the quashing of FIRs registered against protesting students in Delhi, Assam, Maharashtra, West Bengal and Bihar between July 20 and 25. The court invoked its special powers under Article 142 to quash the FIRs pic.twitter.com/jmJP5ibI7v
— IANS (@ians_india) September 1, 2026
