The Supreme Court will hear an application filed by the lead petitioner seeking the reconstitution of the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) set up to probe allegations of sexual assault, online harassment, and police misconduct during the NEET paper leak protests at Jantar Mantar.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned the application and submitted, "We have an application in the Jantar Mantar protest matter, My Lord. We have an application regarding the committee. Lordships can just list it anytime next week."

To which Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, "I have something to say. It's a very mischievous application. Let it be listed with the main matter. The prayer is to reconstitute the committee constituted by Your Lordships and investigating... minister... so and so. And they have given names that these judges should be heading, etc. My Lord, this is not a political platform. Something else is happening."

Sankaranarayanan said, "I'm not saying what the contents of the application are"

Mehta replied, "There's something else which is happening."

Sankaranarayanan added, "I'm just saying this application may be listed, eventually Your Lordships will take a call one way or the other."

Chief Justice Kant said, "We don't appreciate the mentioning of these judge's names."

Sankaranarayanan said, "I have not said a word...Even when the application is listed, I'm not going to mention names, as I didn't last time. None of us mentioned names. We gave it up in writing. There is a way of doing these things. So we just request that the application be listed. That's all we are seeking."

Advocate Prashant Bhushan added, "That application, My Lord, reflects a common concern of many of the petitioners. It's... although it's an application filed by the lead petitioner, but it reflects a common concern..."

Chief Justice added, "Mr. Bhushan...Number one, they will work under the direct supervision of the Supreme Court. It's not that we have disposed of the matter. Matter is pending in Supreme Court. We are keeping short dates. Number one. Number two... with best of the ability, sometimes you have to find out the availability, the consent, the profile, and everything...We always keep that in mind. Number three, all of you are there to assist the committee. Whatever information you give, let them work and see how they perform."

Another counsel added that the Petitioners are not members of the Committee, to which Chief Justice Kant said that is not even possible to do.  

Chief Justice Kant said, "Parties can't become judges in their own."

Bhushan added, "There are serious misgivings that many of the petitioners have about the..."

To which Solicitor General Mehta interrupted and said, "No, no, My Lord, some petitioners have perennial misgivings about every institution."

The Members of the Committee are: i. Justice (Retd.) R. Subhash Reddy, Former Judge of the Supreme Court (Chairperson) ii. Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, Former Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court (Member) iii. Justice Shalinder Kaur, Former Judge of the Delhi High Court (Member) iv. Shri Rishi Kumar Shukla, Former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (Member), and v. Dr. L.R. Bishnoi, Retired Director General of Police, Meghalaya (Member)

Earlier, on August 3, 2026, the Court clarified that the NCT of Delhi and state governments were at liberty to close or withdraw First Information Reports (FIRs) registered against candidates and citizens protesting. The Court also clarified that the word "criminal antecedents" in the previous order is to be read as grave and heinous offences.

The Court had issued interim directions prohibiting coercive action against students without criminal antecedents, ordering the immediate release of all detained minors, and mandating the preservation of all digital evidence and CCTV footage.

The Court also asked the Centre to preserve the ammunition log of the Rapid Action Force (RAF) deployed at the Jantar Mantar and took note of a plea on the use of metallic pellet guns during the protests.

Cause Title: Shailendra Mani Tripathi v. Union of India & Ors.[W.P.(Crl.) No. 280/2026] 

Tags: