New Delhi | 01 Sep 2026
The Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed criminal cases linked to the July NEET paper leak protests in Delhi and several states, while allowing Delhi Police to register a fresh FIR against 2,873 people identified as having serious criminal antecedents, subject to strict limits on the allegations that may be investigated.
Supreme Court quashes NEET protest FIRs under Article 142
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana invoked the Supreme Court’s extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to bring the protest-related cases to an end.
The proceedings arose in the case of Shailendra Mani Tripathi v Union of India and related matters concerning protests over examination issues, including the NEET paper leak controversy.
The Centre had sought the quashing of 13 FIRs registered by Delhi Police in connection with protests between July 20 and July 25, 2026. Bihar, Assam, Maharashtra and West Bengal also approached the court seeking similar relief for cases registered in their jurisdictions.
The court further directed that comparable FIRs in other states and Union Territories concerning the same protest events should not be pursued or investigated.
“We deem it appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.”
— Supreme Court Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant
The court clarified that its use of Article 142 was based on the particular circumstances of the case and should not be treated as a binding precedent for other matters.
Delhi Police allowed fresh FIR against 2,873 people
The relief does not extend unconditionally to every person who was present during the demonstrations. The Centre informed the court that 2,873 individuals with serious criminal antecedents, according to the National Crime Records Bureau database, were prima facie present at the protest site.
The Supreme Court granted Delhi Police liberty to register a single fresh FIR concerning those individuals. However, the investigation must be strictly confined to allegations involving bodily harm or destruction of property and cannot be based merely on their participation in the protest.
Those affected by any such fresh FIR will retain the right to challenge police action and pursue remedies available under law.
The distinction is significant because the court’s order closes the protest-related prosecutions against students and other participants while preserving the authorities’ ability to investigate separately identifiable allegations of violence or property damage involving people with serious criminal histories.
No new FIRs over July 20-25 protest events
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the government remained committed to assurances given after discussions with representatives of the Cockroach Janta Party, including that the existing protest-related cases would not be pursued and that no fresh FIRs would be registered over the July 20-25 protest events.
The Supreme Court incorporated those assurances into its directions, effectively preventing further criminal cases based on the same protest incidents, apart from the narrowly permitted fresh case concerning the 2,873 individuals and specified allegations.
CJP withdraws September 5 Delhi protest march
Following the Supreme Court proceedings, the Cockroach Janta Party withdrew its proposed protest march in Delhi scheduled for September 5.
CJP co-convener Saurav Das informed the court that the organisation had decided to call off the march in view of the government’s assurances and the directions issued by the Supreme Court.
The proposed demonstration had been announced amid allegations from the organisation that commitments made after the July protests, particularly concerning withdrawal of criminal cases, had not been implemented.
Centre told to frame nationwide compensation policy within three months
The court also addressed another assurance concerning compensation for families of students who died by suicide in connection with NEET 2026.
It directed the Government of India to formulate a nationwide compensation policy in consultation with state governments within three months. The mechanism is intended to provide a uniform framework for compensation, after which eligible affected families are to receive payments in accordance with the policy.
The Supreme Court is separately dealing with allegations of excessive police force during the protests. A high-powered enquiry committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy has been constituted to examine issues arising from the agitation, including allegations concerning police action.
