Turning ink into understanding…
Newspaper edition · 28 Jul 2026
The Supreme Court on Monday signalled it may frame uniform guidelines for police conduct during protests, as the government simultaneously introduced a Bill to punish exam paper leaks with harsher penalties.
By Benito JD
The Supreme Court on Monday indicated it may consider uniform guidelines to regulate police conduct during mass demonstrations. Hearing petitions related to the July 20 student march to Parliament, the Chief Justice of India orally remarked that the right to peaceful protest is absolutely guaranteed under the Constitution. "Merely because there is agitation, there cannot be police excesses," he said, adding that discipline is integral to the democratic process. The court agreed to hear all pending petitions together on Tuesday.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh urged the court to frame a standard operating protocol for police action during protests, pointing out that allegations of excesses had surfaced across the country. The CJI agreed that such guidelines appeared necessary. The bench also stressed that "self-imposed discipline" on the part of both citizens and law enforcement is essential for democracy.
The Union government on Monday introduced a Bill in the Lok Sabha that provides for harsher penalties for exam paper leaks. The move comes amid widespread student protests over examination irregularities. Opposition members demanded a discussion on police action against protesting students before the Bill could be taken up. The Bill is seen as the government's attempt to address one of the key grievances behind the ongoing agitation.
Delhi Police on Monday said it had identified 2,873 individuals with previous criminal records who were present at the Jantar Mantar protests using AI-enabled facial recognition systems. The system compared live CCTV footage with criminal databases. Among those identified, 989 had been involved in heinous crimes, including 101 in murder cases. Police said the findings would be part of the investigation into the July 20 violence.
Separately, the Centre told the Delhi High Court that a PIL alleging surveillance of protesters had become infructuous as the protest had ended. However, the court suggested the petitioner file a fresh plea seeking general guidelines on surveillance of protests. The petitioner had sought directions to destroy personal data collected through surveillance, citing the government's assurance that no action would be taken against protesters.
The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) on Monday warned of fresh protests, accusing the Centre of violating its assurance that no punitive action would be taken against protesters. The party's spokesperson said hundreds of students had been arrested in Bihar and Bengal, and many were being surveilled or harassed in Delhi and other states. Later, the Bihar government announced it was withdrawing all FIRs against protesters registered before July 26. FIRs in West Bengal and Assam were also withdrawn, the CJP said. However, the party demanded a written agreement from the Centre by Tuesday.
In a related development, Delhi Police said no complaint had been received against a right-wing leader who allegedly assaulted two teenage protesters. The victims said they were asked to come to Delhi to file an FIR.
These stories raise critical questions about the balance between the right to protest and public order, the use of surveillance technology, and the legislative response to recurring issues like exam leaks. Understanding the evolving role of the judiciary in regulating police conduct, the privacy implications of facial recognition, and the political dynamics around protest movements will help you answer questions on governance, fundamental rights, and contemporary political developments.
Now test your understanding with practice questions on Question Better. Sharpen your recall and apply these concepts in MCQ format.
Practice this edition
Open the full Learn workspace for this day's MCQs, tutor, and spaced review.