States join Centre in SC bid to quash FIRs against CJP protesters, testing federalism and protest rights

Hindustan Times - India · 2 Sept 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance

Maharashtra, Assam, West Bengal, and Bihar have approached the Supreme Court seeking to quash FIRs against CJP protesters, aligning with the Centre's move to end criminal proceedings, raising questions about federal coordination and the right to protest.

Key points

Federal-State Coordination: The joint move by four states and the Centre to quash FIRs demonstrates rare federal coordination on handling protest-related cases, potentially setting a precedent for inter-governmental dispute resolution.

Article 142: The Centre invoked the Supreme Court's extraordinary powers under Article 142 to seek quashing of 13 FIRs, highlighting the constitutional mechanism for resolving exceptional legal situations.

Criminal Antecedents: The Delhi Police proposed a fresh FIR against 2,873 individuals with 'serious criminal antecedents' as per NCRB data, focusing on those allegedly involved in bodily harm or property damage during protests.

Judicial Oversight: The Supreme Court's August 3 clarification allowed states to withdraw FIRs against protesters without criminal antecedents, balancing law enforcement with protest rights under Article 19(1)(a).

[GS2-Governance] The case tests India's protest management framework, contrasting the Centre's hardline stance with some states' willingness to withdraw cases, revealing governance divergences in handling dissent.

Legal Framework: The FIRs invoked provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, examining the legal boundaries of protest-related offenses.

Protest Rights: The Supreme Court's refusal to interfere with CJP's proposed September 5 march reinforces constitutional protections for peaceful assembly under reasonable restrictions.

[GS3-Security] The July protests saw Delhi Police and Rapid Action Force using lathi charge, tear gas, and pellet guns, raising questions about proportionate use of force in crowd control.

Way Forward: Establish clear guidelines for protest management balancing Article 19 rights with public order; create an independent mechanism to review police action during protests; implement standardized protocols for FIR registration and withdrawal in mass protest cases across states.

Key terms

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

India's new penal code replacing the Indian Penal Code (IPC), containing provisions related to public order offenses. Its application in protest cases demonstrates the evolving legal framework for balancing fundamental rights with state security interests.

Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act

Special legislation enacted to deter vandalism during protests, imposing strict penalties for destruction of government assets. Its frequent invocation in protest FIRs raises debates about its proportionality versus the right to dissent.

Criminal Antecedents

Legal concept referring to an individual's prior criminal record, used by law enforcement to assess risk. The NCRB database's role in protest-related FIRs highlights the growing intersection between criminal profiling and public order management.

Article 142

Constitutional provision granting the Supreme Court power to pass any order necessary for 'complete justice' in any matter before it. This extraordinary power is used sparingly to resolve complex legal disputes where existing laws are inadequate, and its invocation in protest cases tests judicial boundaries between justice and executive overreach.