Archive · 16 Sep 2026
Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over NEET Protest Lathi-Charge Claims
A group called the Cockroach Janta Party protested in Delhi about demands connected to the NEET paper leak.
During one protest, people tried to march toward Parliament.
Reports said police used batons and tear gas, but Delhi Police denied using lathis.
Nitin Naresh asked the court to help clarify what really happened.
The Delhi High Court said a public interest case needs a clear legal right or dispute.
The judges said newspaper reports and general calls for accountability were not enough by themselves.
The court therefore dismissed the petition.
The dismissal did not settle whether lathis were used during the protest.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking clarification over alleged police lathi-charge during NEET-related protests at Jantar Mantar.
Petitioner Nitin Naresh said Delhi Police’s denial conflicted with media reports and sought directions to decide his representation.
The bench said PIL jurisdiction requires a legal or Constitutional right, or a dispute, rather than general demands for accountability.
The protests began on June 20, and a July 20 march toward Parliament led to clashes, injuries and allegations of police lathi-charge and tear-gas use.
The court’s dismissal focused on the petition’s legal basis, not on conclusively deciding whether police used lathis.
- Who
- The Delhi High Court, petitioner Nitin Naresh, Delhi Police and NEET-related protesters were involved.
- What
- The court dismissed a PIL seeking action on conflicting accounts of an alleged police lathi-charge.
- When
- The ruling was reported on September 16, 2026; the protest began on June 20 and the march occurred on July 20.
- Where
- The protest took place at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, with protesters attempting to march toward Parliament.
- Why
- The court found that the petitioner had not established a statutory, legal or Constitutional right requiring the police to decide his representation or requiring a PIL inquiry.
Petitioner and Media Accounts
Delhi Police and Court’s Legal Focus
What happened during the protest
Petitioner and Media Accounts
Nitin Naresh relied on media reports that presented an account contrary to Delhi Police’s denial of a lathi-charge and sought clarification and accountability.
Delhi Police and Court’s Legal Focus
Delhi Police denied using lathis against students, while the court noted that the police statement and media reports conflicted without deciding which account was correct.
Basis for court intervention
Petitioner and Media Accounts
The petitioner argued that, as a citizen and media professional, he had a right to know the truth and sought directions for the police to decide his representation.
Delhi Police and Court’s Legal Focus
The bench said a PIL requires a demonstrated statutory, legal or Constitutional right, or a dispute, and that broad references to transparency and accountability were insufficient.
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Bench
- Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia
- Petitioner
- Nitin Naresh
- Disputed issue
- Whether police used lathis against students or protesters during a NEET-related protest
- Police position
- Delhi Police denied using lathis
- Protest location
- Jantar Mantar, New Delhi
- Key dates
- Protests began June 20; the disputed march took place July 20
