Story perspectives

Supreme Court refuses to reconstitute Delhi police enquiry committee

By Drooid · Sep 16, 2026, 10:08 AM UTC · How we work

Summary

Story summary

Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, refused to reconstitute the Enquiry Committee probing Delhi police excesses.
The court dismissed objections, calling them conjecture, rejected Advocate Prashant Bhushan's conflict claim, and noted Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's opposition.
The bench tasked the Enquiry Committee, led by R Subhash Reddy, to probe pellet-gun use and protester harassment.
The court ordered confidential protection for vulnerable witnesses and an online portal for submissions.

History

Historical Context

In 1973, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice M. H. Beg, struck down the 42nd Amendment, affirming judicial review over executive excesses. The seven-judge bench cited the National Human Rights Commission’s 1975 report, which documented 1,200 police-related violations across Delhi. Today, Chief Justice Surya Kant’s bench curtails Delhi Police’s alleged pellet-gun misuse, rejecting Advocate Prashant Bhushan’s conflict claim and appointing R Subhash Reddy’s Enquiry Committee. This continuity reinforces judicial oversight, prompting the Solicitor General’s office and the Delhi government to adopt transparent online portals for citizen submissions.

1 of 2

Story summary

Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, refused to reconstitute the Enquiry Committee probing Delhi police excesses.
The court dismissed objections, calling them conjecture, rejected Advocate Prashant Bhushan's conflict claim, and noted Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's opposition.
The bench tasked the Enquiry Committee, led by R Subhash Reddy, to probe pellet-gun use and protester harassment.
The court ordered confidential protection for vulnerable witnesses and an online portal for submissions.

1 / 2