PolityGovernance
News 3 of 24

SC Quashes All NEET Protest FIRs Under CJI Surya Kant; Raises Selective Justice Issue on Right to Peaceful Protest

Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCTeachingSSC GAPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link
02 Sept 2026
~2 min
Source: Indian Express
Key Data:53 days average custody84% of cases granted reliefCJI Surya KantAllahabad High CourtSeptember 2026
Bodies:Supreme CourtAllahabad High CourtParliamentPolice
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.A three-judge bench led by CJI Surya Kant quashed all FIRs related to the NEET paper leak student protests at Jantar Mantar, acting on government requests.

2.The article questions the selective nature of the quashing, contrasting it with ongoing cases against Noida factory workers (average 53 days custody) and unresolved CAA/farmers' protest cases.

3.The Allahabad High Court earlier quashed an NSA detention of a student activist, terming the case 'concocted', but other protesters under the same law saw no blanket relief.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · High

The Supreme Court quashed all FIRs against NEET student protesters, affirming the constitutional right to peaceful protest. However, the editorial raises concerns about selective justice, noting that cases against factory workers, CAA protesters, and farmers remain pending, potentially criminalizing dissent based on the protester's identity.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

CJI leading benchSurya Kant
Average custody for factory workers53 days
Relief given by Allahabad HC84% of cases
Case term by Allahabad HCConcocted

1-Minute Revision

  • ›CJI leading bench: Surya Kant
  • ›Average custody for factory workers: 53 days
  • ›Target this Data: CJI Surya Kant led three-judge bench quashing NEET protest FIRs (September 2026).
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: Supreme Court of India; Allahabad High Court.
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Article 19(1)(a) and (b) – Right to peaceful protest; National Security Act (NSA) – preventive detention.

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Which Article of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the Supreme Court's order quashing FIRs against NEET student protesters:

1. The order was passed by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

2. The FIRs were quashed on the request of the governments at the Centre and some states.

3. The Allahabad High Court had earlier quashed an NSA detention of a student activist, calling the case 'concocted'.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

According to the article, what was the average period a factory worker protester in Noida spent in custody?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What is the primary concern raised by the editorial regarding the Supreme Court's decision to quash FIRs against NEET student protesters?

All 25 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

SC Quashes NEET Protest FIRs Under Article 142, Orders Compensation Policy for Suicide Victims

Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash all FIRs registered against NEET protesters across India, while ordering compensation policy for families of students who died by suicide. This judgment underscores the balance between protest rights and criminal liability, and the government's commitment to address exam leak issues.

Polity Current Affairs

Govt to SC: Only Parliament Can Extend Creamy Layer to SC/ST; Cites Article 341, E V Chinnaiah Case

The government has told the Supreme Court that extending the creamy layer principle to SC/ST is a policy decision for Parliament alone. This reaffirms that reservation for SC/ST is based on historical social criteria, not just economic status, and the creamy layer concept currently applies only to OBCs.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Releases New Gender Sensitivity Handbook, Replaces 2023 Version; Recommends Survivor-Centric Language & Trauma-Informed Court Practices

The Supreme Court has released a new report titled 'Judgments and Gender' replacing its 2023 handbook on combating gender stereotypes. The report, drafted by an expert committee headed by former SC judge Justice Aniruddha Bose, provides practical guidelines for judges to use survivor-centric language, avoid morality-laden expressions, and adopt trauma-informed courtroom practices. This is crucial for UPSC as it reflects judicial reforms in gender sensitivity and victim protection.

Polity Current Affairs

Allahabad HC Quashes NSA Detention of 25-Year-Old DU Graduate in Noida Workers' Protest

The Allahabad High Court quashed the NSA detention of a 25-year-old Delhi University graduate in connection with the Noida workers' protest. This ruling underscores judicial scrutiny of preventive detention laws and the necessity of sufficient grounds. For exam aspirants, it is a key example of judicial review under Article 226 and the limits of the National Security Act.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules NCSC Cannot Issue Binding Directions Under Article 338

The Supreme Court clarified that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has only recommendatory and advisory powers under Article 338, not adjudicatory powers. It cannot issue binding orders in service disputes. This ruling sets boundaries for constitutional commissions under Articles 338, 338A, and 338B.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Replaces 2023 Gender Stereotype Handbook with 2026 Report on Compassionate Court Practices for Trial Judges

The Supreme Court has released a new report replacing its 2023 gender stereotype handbook, shifting focus from language to courtroom trauma. It mandates trial judges to develop an 'Emotional Quotient', control aggressive cross-examinations, and prevent secondary traumatisation of sexual assault survivors, following the Allahabad HC's controversial 'preparation vs attempt' ruling.

Polity Current Affairs

SC: Right to Walk on Demarcated Footpaths is Fundamental Right under Article 19(1)(d) & Article 21

The Supreme Court declared the right to walk on demarcated footpaths as a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, prioritizing pedestrians over motorized vehicles. It has now directed all states and UTs to respond on implementation, making it a high-yield topic for Prelims (constitutional articles, dates) and Mains (urban governance, fundamental rights).

Polity Current Affairs

2026 Amendment Penalises Disruption of Vande Mataram Singing (Up to 3 Years Jail); Bijoe Emmanuel Case Protects Silent Dissent

The 2026 amendment to the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act gives Vande Mataram the same criminal protection as the national anthem, but it does not compel singing. The Supreme Court's Bijoe Emmanuel ruling protects the right to remain silent if participation conflicts with conscience. This has implications for freedom of religion (Articles 25-26) and freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)).