The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the closure of FIRs registered across India in connection with student protests held between July 20 and July 25, providing major relief to students who participated in the demonstrations.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana directed that such FIRs should not be pursued or investigated and must be treated as closed for all purposes.
The Court also quashed FIRs specifically identified in applications filed by the Centre through the Delhi Police and by the governments of Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra and Assam.
Although the applications seeking quashing of the FIRs were filed only by the Centre and the four states, the Supreme Court extended the benefit of its order pan-India.
The bench said the decision was being taken keeping in mind the future of students who had participated in the protests bona fide.
The Court further directed that no State or Union Territory shall register any fresh FIR in connection with incidents arising from the protests conducted between July 20 and July 25.
The directions were issued by invoking the Supreme Court's extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, which enables the Court to pass orders necessary to do complete justice in a matter.
However, the bench clarified that its order was based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and should not be treated as a precedent.
The Court made an exception in the case of 2,873 individuals who were present at the Jantar Mantar protests.
The Delhi Police has been permitted to continue proceedings against these individuals on account of what the Court was told were their serious criminal antecedents.
During an earlier hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had submitted that these individuals were facing grave allegations involving offences such as murder, rape and abduction.
The distinction effectively separates students who participated in the demonstrations from individuals whom the authorities allege had serious criminal histories unrelated to ordinary participation in the protests.
The hearing also saw the Centre make a significant commitment regarding the families of students who died by suicide following the cancellation of NEET-UG 2026.
The bench recorded the Solicitor General's statement that the Centre would formulate a policy for granting compensation to the families within three months.
The Solicitor General said the Centre remained committed to the assurance given to the protesters and sought three months to work out the modalities of the compensation scheme.
The applications for quashing the FIRs were also described as part of the government's effort to honour assurances allegedly given to CJP leaders on July 25 that cases against protesters would be withdrawn and no fresh FIRs would be registered over the same incidents.
The Supreme Court's order also resulted in the withdrawal of a protest march announced by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) for September 5 in Delhi.
CJP co-convener and spokesperson Saurav Das, who was present in court, told the bench that the organisation had decided to withdraw the planned protest in light of the government's assurances and the Supreme Court's order.
Das said the organisation would now look forward to the implementation of the directions issued by the Court.
The withdrawal came after the Solicitor General submitted that, with the Centre acting on its assurances regarding the protesters and compensation, the CJP was expected to reconsider its planned September 5 demonstration.
The development follows the Supreme Court's hearing on August 18, when the bench had indicated that it was inclined to exercise its Article 142 powers to quash the FIRs.
The issue had arisen because of legal complications surrounding the withdrawal of FIRs once they had already been registered.
The Court was informed that simply directing authorities to withdraw an FIR could create procedural difficulties, as a registered FIR can ordinarily be closed through a closure report, which is subject to the jurisdiction of the concerned Magistrate.
The Solicitor General had subsequently told the Court that, apart from the 2,873 individuals with serious criminal antecedents, the cases against other protesters could be quashed.
The Court has now exercised its special constitutional powers to provide a comprehensive resolution for the FIRs connected with the July 20–25 protests.
The Supreme Court's decision provides broad legal relief to students who participated in the protests during the specified period.
In practical terms, the order means:
FIRs concerning the July 20–25 student protests across India are to be treated as closed.
The order applies across all States and Union Territories, despite applications having been filed only by the Centre and four states.
States and UTs have been prohibited from registering fresh FIRs relating to the specified protest incidents.
The Delhi Police can continue proceedings against the identified 2,873 individuals because of their serious criminal antecedents.
The Centre has three months to formulate a compensation policy for families of students who died by suicide following the cancellation of NEET-UG 2026.
The CJP has withdrawn its planned September 5 protest march in Delhi.
The case, Yashovardhan Azan and Others v. Union of India and Others, and connected matters, thus marks a significant intervention by the Supreme Court in the legal aftermath of the student protests.
