A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Delhi High Court seeking a court-monitored investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) into the July 20 “Chalo Sansad” protest held over the alleged NEET paper leak, alleging that the demonstration was part of a larger conspiracy involving foreign-funded organisations, political actors and external elements.
Filed by Advocates Sneh Vardhan and Pratibha Sinha on behalf of Satish Kumar Aggarwal, former Vice-President of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, the petition contended that the incident raised issues of national security and should not be treated merely as a law-and-order matter. The respondents include the Union of India, NIA, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Commissioner of Delhi Police and the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD).
According to the petitioner, protests over the alleged NEET paper leak began at Jantar Mantar on June 6 and culminated in the “Chalo Sansad” march on July 20. Aggarwal noted that what initially started as a student-led protest was subsequently influenced by political leaders and other organisations, transforming it into a politically driven agitation.
The July 20 demonstration witnessed violence, stone-pelting, obstruction of public movement and emergency services, attacks on journalists, damage to public and private property, injuries to police personnel, disruption of law and order in the Connaught Place area and an attempted breach of Parliament security, alleged the petition, adding that protesters attempted to enter the Parliament complex, making the incident a matter warranting investigation by a specialised national security agency.
The petitioner sought transfer of the investigation into the July 20 incidents to the NIA or another specialised agency, along with the transfer of all FIRs registered by the Delhi Police in connection with the protest. The plea further sought directions to identify and prosecute all persons allegedly responsible for violence, rioting, vandalism, obstruction of emergency services, criminal trespass, destruction of public and private property, assault on police personnel and journalists, and other offences arising from the incident.
The PIL alleged that the protest was not a genuine student movement but appeared to be part of a larger conspiracy allegedly aimed at destabilising the country through financial influence and foreign-backed networks. It contended that an independent investigation was necessary to ascertain the role of organisers, participants, political actors and any external or foreign entities that may have financed, coordinated or influenced the agitation.
It also referred to the participation of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk in the protest and relied on publicly available reports regarding his alleged associations with foreign organisations. Wangchuk’s affiliations, funding relationships and institutional associations required examination by the investigating agency as part of the broader inquiry into the network of individuals and organisations connected with the protest, noted the plea.
The petitioner further referred to the participation of author Arundhati Roy and alleged that her presence, along with her past public statements on issues concerning Kashmir, raised questions that merit investigation by competent authorities.
The PIL mentioned Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Atishi Marlena, Dimple Yadav, Dharmendra Yadav and Chandra Shekhar Azad, alleging that political leaders took over the protest and influenced or instigated the participants. The involvement of these leaders required investigation to determine their role, if any, in the events that followed, claimed the petition.
According to the petitioner, the Constitution guaranteed the fundamental right to peaceful assembly under Article 19(1)(b), however, the right is subject to reasonable restrictions and does not extend to acts involving violence, destruction of property, obstruction of emergency services or threats to public order and national security.
The plea argued that the alleged attempt to breach Parliament security and the possibility of organised or external involvement justified an investigation under the framework applicable to offences affecting the sovereignty, integrity and security of the nation.
The petitioner urged the High Court to direct a comprehensive probe by the NIA or another specialised agency to determine the full extent of the alleged conspiracy, examine the source of funding, identify all persons responsible and ensure appropriate criminal prosecution in accordance with law.
