New Delhi, Nov 5 The Supreme Court on Thursday said the High-Powered Enquiry Committee (HPEC) appointed by it to probe alleged violence and police excesses during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led protests at Jantar Mantar has so far received hardly any complaints from those affected.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi permitted the HPEC to examine materials, including video clips, submitted by petitioners before the court on behalf of the victims.
The committee, headed by former Supreme Court Judge Justice R Subhash Reddy, informed the court that despite activating a portal and providing a dedicated email address for filing complaints online and physically, it had received hardly any responses.
The bench perused the action taken report filed by HPEC on October 31 and noted that the committee had created a dedicated portal inviting complaints and issued notices on October 17 in 149 newspapers across the country, asking people to submit their complaints virtually or physically or via registered post.
"The report further indicates that there was hardly any response and therefore the Committee again reiterated the particulars on October 21. Despite the efforts, hardly any complaints have been received on the portal and none on email," the bench said in its order.
"We have impressed upon the counsel for the parties, since there is no requirement of disclosure of names of complainants/victims, let the entire materials within their possession be forwarded to the given address of HPEC or the portal, to enable it to consider such material. The petitions/affidavits filed before the Court be forwarded to the Committee," it said.
The top court directed that petitions, videos and complaints relating to the alleged incidents be forwarded to the panel, which also comprises former Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi High Court judge Justice Shalinder Kaur, former CBI director Rishi Kumar Shukla and retired Meghalaya DGP L R Bishnoi.
It also accepted Bishnoi's request to be relieved from the panel due to personal reasons.
The bench asked the committee not to wait indefinitely for complaints and to proceed with its fact-finding exercise on the basis of the materials already received.
The bench noted that the HPEC had held a sitting at its office on October 29, with publicity being given through print and electronic media. However, only one complainant appeared before it that day and submitted an affidavit. Some police personnel had also appeared before the panel.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for some petitioners, disputed the HPEC's report, saying the petitioners had submitted a representation even before the portal was opened and filed another one after its launch. They were informed that the submissions would be considered in due course, he said.
Senior advocate Vrinda Grover submitted that materials already placed before the top court by petitioners, which allegedly showed instances of police excesses, could be forwarded to the committee for examination instead of requiring each affected person to approach it individually.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and Delhi Police, however, submitted that the PIL petitioners might not have personal knowledge of the incidents and it would be appropriate if the victims of violence themselves come forward.
Grover alleged that not even a single FIR had been registered in relation to the alleged instances of violence and police excesses.
Sankaranarayanan added that although the top court's earlier order clarified that the constitution of the committee would not prevent departmental action against officers found to have committed misconduct, no such action had been taken.
Justice Bagchi clarified, "What we said was that the constitution of the committee should not be understood as preventing police authorities or their superiors from taking action if they find that someone deployed at the site committed a transgression."
The CJI urged the petitioners to encourage those affected to approach the committee and submit their accounts of the incidents.
"Our request to all of you is to motivate the complainants to come forward. There appears to be a gap between the material which petitioners say they have submitted and what has actually reached the committee," the CJI said.
The court said the complaints, which can be submitted anonymously without disclosing phone numbers or other personal details, should be examined by the panel.
The top court in August ordered the constitution of the committee while hearing a batch of pleas alleging police excesses against student protesters during the agitation spearheaded by the CJP, alongside allegations of violence against police personnel.
The march to Parliament on July 20 in Delhi had witnessed clashes between protesters and security personnel, who used lathis and tear gas shells to disperse crowds attempting to move towards Parliament.
The student-led protests, which spread to several cities, centred on the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.
The agitation began at Jantar Mantar on June 20 and was called off on July 25 after Pradhan resigned, and the government accepted the CJP's other demands.
