The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed disinclination to revive a criminal case against Punjab chief minister Bhagwant Mann for being part of a violent protest outside the then CM’s office in 2020 observing that now that he’s holding a responsible post, he will act responsibly.
Event Context
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said, “Now that he is holding a responsible position, we are sure he will act responsibly also,” as it adjourned the hearing on an appeal by the Chandigarh administration challenging a Punjab and Haryana high court order quashing the first information report (FIR) against him.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for Chandigarh, sought an adjournment as the Union Territory administration was in the process of moving separate appeals against a series of orders passed by the high court against Mann and other accused.
The high court allowed the plea filed by Mann and other accused on the ground that the charges were not serious and the injuries sustained by police were not of a grievous nature. Approximately 750–800 party workers had gathered on the date of the incident to stage their protest in support of the same cause.
The HC failed to find any material to establish offences under Sections 332 and 353 IPC, relating to voluntarily causing hurt and use of criminal force against public servants while discharging official duties.
Team Analysis
The HC order was passed in November 2025 quashing the criminal case registered against Mann and others in January 2020 for protesting outside the then CM’s house against an increase in power tariff and in the process, pushing and injuring the police personnel that prevented the protestors, mostly belonging to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The other accused along with Mann included state ministers Aman Arora, Harpal Singh Cheema among other AAP leaders.
It said, “There was no reason for the police to stop the protestors from marching ahead towards the Chief Minister’s residence. Admittedly, a prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC had not been issued.” Further, the high court found that no one was specifically named for allegedly pelting stones at the police.
“It is not the case that the petitioners asked them to do so. The nature of alleged instigation by the petitioners has also not been mentioned; nor have specific words or gestures of any kind been attributed to them,” the high court order stated.
Match Outlook
“The high court has conducted a mini-trial and we have a strong case on merits,” Raju said. Allowing the request, the bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, said, “Everybody does naare-baazi (sloganeering)… We are making it clear to you that we are not inclined to interfere.” The court agreed to take up the matter next on July 20.
The high court concluded that the immediate trigger for the mob to turn violent appeared to be the shooting of water cannon at them. Also, the injuries suffered by the police personnel were due to shoving and jostling by the mob, which could not be specifically attributed to the accused, it added.
