Delhi NEET protests: SC investigation into police excesses, journalist safety

• A PIL filed before the Supreme Court seeks a neutral investigation into alleged police excesses against protesters and journalists during NEET protests in Delhi.
• The petition alleges that several journalists were assaulted, intimidated, or subjected to gendered abuse while covering the demonstrations.
• The Supreme Court is set to hear petitions related to the NEET protests, including one seeking the constitution of an independent Judicial Commission to inquire into police excesses.
• The case raises important constitutional questions about the protection available to journalists performing their professional duties during public demonstrations.
• The outcome of this case will have significant implications for freedom of speech and press in India.

Every side must and will get justice ..those who so deserve ..in accordance with law they should get the justice.

A series of incidents between July 18 and July 23 have left several journalists covering the NEET protests at Jantar Mantar in Delhi facing assault, intimidation, and gendered abuse. The alleged attacks on Times Now reporter Dev Kotak, Shafali Nigam, and her cameraperson, as well as the reported targeting of ABP News reporter Varun Bhasin, have been cited in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed before the Supreme Court. The petition alleges that these incidents are not isolated cases, but rather part of a larger pattern of police excesses against protesters and journalists alike.

The NEET protests, which began over alleged paper leaks, have taken a violent turn, with reports of police using excessive force to disperse crowds. The situation has raised concerns about the safety of journalists covering public demonstrations in India. The PIL filed by Abhigya Kushwah seeks directions for a neutral investigation into these incidents and protection for victims and witnesses.

The Supreme Court is set to hear petitions related to the NEET protests, including one seeking the constitution of an independent Judicial Commission headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to inquire into police excesses during the demonstrations.

The PIL filed before the Supreme Court raises important constitutional questions about the protection available to journalists performing their professional duties during public demonstrations. The petition contends that the case is not about choosing between the government and protesters, but rather concerns the constitutional principles that require the court to act impartially. In this context, it's worth noting that the Supreme Court has previously ruled on issues related to police conduct during protests, including the 2006 judgment in Prakash Singh vs Union of India, which emphasized the importance of maintaining public order while respecting individual rights.

The petition also seeks the preservation of CCTV footage and other evidence related to the alleged attacks on journalists. This is a critical aspect of any investigation into police excesses, as it can help establish accountability and ensure that those responsible are held to justice.

The NEET protests and the alleged police excesses against protesters and journalists have significant implications for freedom of speech and press in India. The Supreme Court's decision on these petitions will set a crucial precedent for future cases related to police conduct during public demonstrations. Lawyers and compliance officers should watch this development closely, as it may impact their advice to clients navigating complex issues related to police conduct and journalist safety.

The case also highlights the need for greater accountability in policing, particularly when it comes to protecting journalists and maintaining public order. The Supreme Court's investigation into these incidents has the potential to bring much-needed transparency and justice to those affected.

Lawyers and compliance officers should watch for the potential implications of this development on freedom of speech and press, particularly in relation to police conduct during public demonstrations. They may need to advise clients on navigating these complex issues or cite relevant precedents in future cases.

Source: Original reporting via [Source]