Delhi HC refuses to entertain PIL seeking NIA probe into CJP's Parliament march

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a probe by the NIA or any "specialised agency" into the Cockroach Janta Party-led march to Parliament on July 20 to protest against the NEET paper leak and other related issues.

A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said the alleged incidents of vandalism were in the knowledge and notice of the authorities, who would take action according to the law.

The bench also said under the law, it was for the Centre to refer any case to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for investigation, and not the court.


Also Read: NEET-UG paper leak- SC seeks progress report on transparency, digital infrastructure, security on pleas seeking NTA overhaul

"If there is an FIR, recourse to the NIA has to be taken by the respective government. How can this be a PIL? You are asking for an opinion that these are fit cases. This job has been entrusted to the central government," the court remarked while hearing the PIL by Satish Kumar Aggarwal, ex-vice president of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha.

"You approach the authorities; they will take action," the bench told the petitioner, who also sought identification of "all persons responsible for acts of violence, vandalism, obstruction of emergency services, damage to public and private property and other offences" and registration of an FIR against them.

In view of the court's observations, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta asked the petitioner's counsel to consider withdrawing the PIL, following which he requested the bench to withdraw it.

"The PIL is dismissed as withdrawn," the court ordered.

The bench also asked another petitioner, Save India Foundation, to approach the authorities with his grievances over destruction of public property and attack on police personnel on July 20.

As the petitioner's counsel claimed that "dissent became disorder" during the agitation, the court responded, "We are not entering into that debate."

The court permitted the trust to approach the authorities with his prayer to initiate criminal action.

"In case the petitioner makes the representation, the same shall be attended to and appropriate decision shall be taken," it ordered.

Lawyer Barun Kumar Sinha, appearing for Aggarwal, contended that a probe by the NIA or the CBI should be ordered considering the gravity of the offences committed by the "unruly mob" during the July 20 protest.

"Situation in Delhi is beyond control. Metro is closed. Roads are blocked," Sinha said.

The court, however, said it can order transfer of an investigation to the CBI if it was not satisfied with the progress of a primary investigating agency, and that stage was yet to come.

It clarified that it was "not reflecting" on what has been "reported" but considering the legal issues.

The petitioner's counsel also alleged that certain protestors attacked a female journalist, emphasising that the court has already issued notice on PILs over alleged police brutality on protestors.

"Don't try to draw that dichotomy. Let's not go into all this. Please, I request," the court retorted.

During the hearing, SG Mehta said he had no objections to the court listing the present PIL along with the PILs over the police action on protestors.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma said in the earlier PIL, the court invoked "public law" to entertain pleas against the police action, and similarly, in the present PIL, it can seek the "complete picture" to take a "holistic view".

Refusing to issue notice in the matter, the court clarified that it was not curtailing the Centre's power to refer any case arising from the march to the NIA.

"There is every authority available to you to deal with such situations," the court stated.

Noting that there are top court's judgements dealing with destruction of public property and mob violence, the bench told the Centre, "Do your job as mandated by the Supreme Court."

Aggarwal said in the PIL that the participation of activists and political leaders as well as the alleged involvement of foreign-funded organisations, has raised serious questions about the "true nature, purpose, and objectives of the protest".

It said these concerns call for a "comprehensive investigation" to ascertain if any "external elements were involved in activities prejudicial to public order, national security, and the sovereignty and integrity of India".

"In these circumstances, the petitioner seeks appropriate directions for registration of an FIR, a thorough and impartial investigation into the incidents connected to the protests, and further investigation by an appropriate specialised agency, including the National Investigation Agency, if the competent authority considers that the material disclosed warrants investigation under the applicable law," the plea submitted.

The CJP has been protesting since June 20 demanding Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan's resignation over alleged examination irregularities.

On July 20, thousands of protesters gathered at the Jantar Mantar for a 'Chalo Sansad' march to press their demands, despite heavy security deployment.

As the crowds swelled, police baton-charged and tear-gassed the protesters when they attempted to march towards Parliament, on Day 1 of the Monsoon Session.

The ensuing clashes left several police personnel and protesters injured.