Supreme Court Declines Urgent Hearing on Plea Against Police Action on Student Protesters

New Delhi, July 22, 2026: The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to urgently hear a petition challenging the alleged police action against student protesters during the recent "Chalo Parliament" (CJP) march in the capital, with Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant telling the petitioners' counsel, "Don't waste our time."

The plea was mentioned before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant. Counsel for the petitioners pressed for an urgent hearing, arguing that videos circulating online allegedly showed police using excessive force against students during the demonstration. When the lawyer offered to play the footage in court, the Bench was unmoved:

"We are not interested in videos. We don't have time to watch."

With that, the Court declined to grant the matter an urgent listing.

The petition had asked the Court to step in and examine the alleged use of excessive force by security personnel while dispersing demonstrators, and to fix accountability and grant appropriate relief if the police were found to have acted unlawfully.

At the heart of the case is the "Chalo Parliament" protest, in which students and activists had gathered in Delhi over education-related grievances, including alleged irregularities in examinations. The march drew a heavy deployment of Delhi Police and other security personnel across central Delhi, and confrontations broke out as protesters tried to push toward areas that had been cordoned off. Videos of the clashes soon began circulating widely on social media, several of them alleging brutality on the part of the police, even as authorities insisted the crowd-control measures were necessary to maintain public order and enforce the restrictions in place.

It's worth noting that the Bench's remarks came only in the course of deciding whether the matter deserved an urgent hearing — the Court did not go through the evidence the petitioners had placed on record, nor did it make any observation on the allegations of police excess. A refusal to list a case urgently is a procedural call, not a verdict on its merits; the substantive questions raised in the petition remain undecided.

The case has attracted public attention because it concerns allegations of police action during a student protest. While the Supreme Court declined to hear the matter on an urgent basis, the substantive issues raised in the petition remain undecided. Any further proceedings will depend on the Court's future listing of the matter.