SC Quashes FIRs Against Student Protesters, Draws Line Between Dissent and Violence

In a major relief to students who participated in nationwide protests over the NEET-UG paper leak and examination irregularities, the Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed criminal cases registered against protesters, saying their future prospects should not be damaged merely because they participated in an agitation.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, invoked the court's extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to bring an end to the criminal proceedings. The court's approach underlined an important distinction between the right to peaceful protest and acts of criminal violence.

The court ordered the closure of FIRs linked to protests held across the country between July 20 and 25, extending the relief beyond cases specifically placed before it. However, the order did not provide blanket immunity for those accused of serious offences. Delhi Police was permitted to register a fresh FIR against 2,873 individuals with serious criminal antecedents, with any investigation confined to allegations involving bodily harm or destruction of property.

The ruling reflects the principle that while students have the right to express dissent through peaceful demonstrations, violence, attacks on individuals and deliberate damage to property remain subject to criminal investigation. It also emphasises the importance of individual accountability rather than treating every participant in a large protest as a criminal.

The Supreme Court's concern over the consequences of criminal cases is particularly significant for young students. Even without a conviction, prolonged legal proceedings can disrupt education, employment opportunities, higher studies and future career plans.

The bench also directed the Centre to formulate a nationwide policy for compensation within three months for the families of students who died by suicide in connection with the NEET 2026 controversy.

Following the court's order and the Centre's assurances, CJP co-convener Saurav Das announced the withdrawal of the group's planned September 5 protest march in Delhi.

Beyond the immediate legal relief, the episode has renewed scrutiny of India's high-stakes examination system, raising broader concerns about examination security, institutional accountability and public trust. The controversy has reinforced the need for reforms that prevent paper leaks and irregularities before they trigger widespread student unrest.

The Supreme Court's message was clear: peaceful dissent deserves constitutional protection, but genuine violence must remain open to investigation.