SUPREME COURT DECLINES ORAL MENTIONING ON ALLEGED POLICE VIOLENCE AT STUDENT PROTEST, SAYS IT HAS NO TIME TO WATCH VIDEOS:

The Supreme Court declined to entertain an oral mentioning seeking urgent judicial intervention concerning the ongoing protests by NEET-UG aspirants at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. The request was made by an advocate who alleged police excesses against protesting students and sought immediate directions regarding the conduct of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET-UG). However, the Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan declined to grant an urgent hearing, observing that the matter was not appropriate for oral mentioning and advising counsel not to consume the Court's limited judicial time in that manner.

During the mentioning, the advocate informed the Court that students protesting at Jantar Mantar were allegedly being subjected to police brutality, including the use of tear gas and other coercive measures. He submitted that the matter involved issues of considerable public importance requiring immediate judicial intervention. In addition to raising concerns regarding the alleged police action against the demonstrators, the counsel sought directions concerning the conduct of the NEET-UG examination. According to him, the students were seeking three principal reliefs, namely, that the examination process be conducted in a completely free and fair manner by the government, that the National Testing Agency (NTA) be dissolved in view of the controversies surrounding its functioning over the past several years, and that the Court take cognizance of the alleged use of excessive force by the police against peaceful protesters. The advocate further stated that he had collected video recordings purportedly depicting the alleged police violence and was prepared to place the same before the Court.

The Bench, however, declined to entertain the oral request. Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that counsel should refrain from wasting the Court's valuable time, adding that the advocate's own time was equally precious. When the advocate referred to the existence of video recordings allegedly documenting police action against the protesters, the Chief Justice made it clear that the Court was not inclined to examine such material during an oral mentioning. The Bench observed that it neither had the time nor the occasion to watch videos in the course of mentioning proceedings, thereby refusing to proceed further with the request for urgent intervention. Consequently, no immediate directions were issued by the Court on either the allegations of police excesses or the grievances relating to the conduct of the NEET-UG examination.

The controversy arises against the backdrop of continuing public concern over the administration of the NEET-UG examination, which serves as the single nationwide entrance examination for admission to undergraduate medical courses across India. Conducted annually by the National Testing Agency, the examination has in recent years been the subject of sustained legal challenges and widespread criticism following allegations of paper leaks, irregularities in the award of grace marks, and other systemic deficiencies. These controversies have prompted repeated protests by medical aspirants, student organisations, and youth groups, many of whom have assembled at Jantar Mantar demanding greater transparency, accountability, and reforms in the examination process.

The advocate's submissions before the Supreme Court reflected these broader concerns by questioning both the integrity of the examination system and the response of law enforcement authorities to the demonstrations. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the matter through an oral mentioning, indicating that such grievances could not be considered in that manner and refusing to grant any immediate relief sought by the protesting students.