SCBA, SCAORA condemn police action on students, seek independent probe

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) have issued separate statements condemning the use of force against protesters during the Parliament march in Delhi. While urging the authorities to uphold constitutional protections for peaceful dissent, they have called for an independent inquiry into allegations of excessive police action, Live Law reported.

In a resolution issued today, the SCBA strongly condemned what it described as 'brutal lathi charge' on innocent students, saying the incident resulted in several students sustaining serious injuries. It also said members of the legal fraternity, including members of the SCBA, were injured during the incident.

"The use of excessive and disproportionate force against peaceful students and members of the Bar is deeply disturbing and wholly unacceptable in a democratic society," the Association said.

The SCBA has called upon the concerned authorities to conduct an immediate, impartial and time-bound inquiry into the incident. They have been told to identify those responsible for alleged excessive use of force and take appropriate action in accordance with law. The association has urged the authorities to ensure proper medical treatment and assistance for all injured students and members of the legal fraternity, and to take necessary measures to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. Expressing solidarity with those injured, the Association reiterated its commitment to protecting constitutional rights, human dignity and the rule of law.

The statements came after Delhi Police used lathi charge and tear gas to disperse students and young protesters attempting to march towards Parliament during the Monsoon Session. The protest was over alleged irregularities in public examinations and included a demand for the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.

Earlier today, the Supreme Court declined a request for urgent listing of a plea challenging the police action against students during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led protest march in Delhi. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant refused to examine video footage of the alleged police brutality at the mentioning stage.

Peaceful dissent is a constitutional right, says SCAORA

In a separate statement, the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) expressed "deep concern" over reports and visuals depicting the use of force by the Delhi Police against students and young protesters who had assembled to peacefully voice their grievances concerning the integrity of public examinations and the future of the country's youth.

The Association acknowledged reports indicating that force, including lathi charges and tear gas, was used to disperse demonstrators attempting to march towards Parliament during the Monsoon Session.

SCAORA said that in a constitutional democracy, peaceful dissent is not an act of defiance but an exercise of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.

While acknowledging that the State is empowered to maintain public order, the Association said every restriction on these freedoms must satisfy the constitutional requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality, adding that the burden of justifying any use of force against citizens exercising their constitutional rights rests upon the State.

Referring to the Supreme Court's judgments in Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad (1973) and Ramlila Maidan Incident, In re (2012), SCAORA said the apex court has consistently recognised that the right to hold peaceful public meetings flows directly from the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19 and that police action against peaceful assemblies must conform to constitutional standards of necessity and proportionality.

The Association called upon the concerned authorities to ensure that any allegation of excessive use of force is independently and impartially examined.

It further said that the strength of the Republic lies not in suppressing dissent but in protecting it within the framework of the Constitution, adding that the true measure of constitutional governance is reflected in how the State responds to peaceful disagreement and that adherence to constitutional liberties remains the surest safeguard of the rule of law.