Students' protest: CJP questions SC order, urges Centre to honour pledge on FIR withdrawal
Party alleges court directions conflict with government's assurance to protesters, warns of resuming nationwide agitation if commitments are not fulfilled
The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) on Tuesday expressed concern over the Supreme Court's interim order in petitions related to the nationwide protests over the alleged NEET paper leak, claiming one of the directions could undermine the Centre's assurance that no action would be taken against peaceful protesters.
In a statement, CJP member Sourav Das said Direction No. 4 of the interim order, which allows governments to continue investigations in existing FIRs, contradicted the assurance allegedly given by the Centre on July 25 that FIRs against protesters would be withdrawn and that no participant in the agitation would be targeted.
According to the CJP, it had called off its nationwide protest in good faith based on the government's assurance.
The party alleged that the order could be used by the Centre and BJP-ruled states to continue criminal proceedings against protesters, despite the understanding reached during talks.
Das also questioned why government lawyers did not inform the Supreme Court about the assurances allegedly given to the protesters during the hearing.
The CJP maintained that the Supreme Court's order does not prevent the executive from withdrawing FIRs or deciding not to pursue cases against peaceful protesters. It cited Bihar and Assam as examples of states that had withdrawn or decided not to proceed with cases.
The party urged the Centre and the concerned state governments to place the terms of the alleged assurance before the Supreme Court so that the court is informed of the commitments made during negotiations.
Calling for the government to honour its commitments, the CJP reiterated its demand for the withdrawal of FIRs and for ensuring that no protester faces future punitive action.
The party warned that it would resume its nationwide agitation if the assurances were not implemented, alleging that reneging on the commitments would amount to a breach of public trust.
Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court directed the release of student protesters below the age of 18 with no criminal antecedents, restrained coercive action against eligible protesters during the pendency of proceedings, and allowed investigations in existing FIRs to continue while directing the preservation of digital evidence related to the protests.