Jantar Mantar clash: SC to hear pleas on alleged police excesses on July 27

Times of IndiaIndependentCenter4 hr. ago

The Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear two petitions alleging excessive police action during student-led protests over the alleged NEET paper leak. The protests, which took place in multiple states including Delhi, involved clashes between demonstrators and security forces who used batons and tear gas. The petitions were filed by senior advocates Shyam Divan and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, seeking an early hearing. Meanwhile, another bench of the Supreme Court emphasized the need for long-term reforms in the NEET examination system, urging the government to implement recommendations from the Radhakrishnan Committee and adopt the IIT model. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the court that the government is taking additional measures beyond the committee's recommendations to safeguard students' futures.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of both the legal proceedings involving the alleged police excesses and the broader reform discussions regarding the NEET examination system. It reports on the Supreme Court's decision to hear petitions, the involvement of various legal representatives, and a糅

Hindustan TimesIndependentCenter5 hr. ago

The Supreme Court of India agreed to hear two new petitions regarding alleged police excesses during the July 20 crackdown on student protests in the national capital. These petitions were filed after Chief Justice Surya Kant clarified that no formal writ petition had previously been submitted to the court. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranararayanan informed the court that the petitions had been formally filed and assigned diary numbers, emphasizing the ongoing nature of police violence against students. The CJI criticized media reports that claimed the court had rejected such pleas, stating that no petition had been filed until recently. The court directed that the petitions be listed for hearing on Monday, highlighting concerns over misinformation and the need for judicial intervention.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of legal developments without overtly favoring any political stance. While the issue of police conduct during protests is politically sensitive, the reporting focuses on procedural aspects of the Supreme Court's actions rather than taking a clear ideological sl

Times of IndiaIndependentCenter7 hr. ago

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant denied allegations that he had refused to hear a petition challenging police actions against students during a protest. He clarified that no formal writ petition had been filed in the Supreme Court, and that a lawyer had only mentioned a letter representation. The CJI criticized media reports as 'reckless' and 'irresponsible,' stating they spread false information. The controversy arose from clashes during a protest led by the Cockroach Janta Party, where police used force to disperse demonstrators. The lawyers had requested an urgent hearing over alleged police brutality, but the bench rejected the request, citing lack of time to review video evidence.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the CJI's clarification and the legal proceedings, without overtly favoring either side. It includes quotes from the CJI and the lawyer, and does not take a clear ideological stance on the broader issue of police action versus student protests. The framing,