"Everyone Does Naarebaazi In Democracy": Top Court Relief For Bhagwant Man

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohanawas was hearing the Chandigarh administration's challenge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court order

16 Jul 2026, 13:38 · www.ndtv.com

Show
Quick Read
Summary is AI-generated, newsroom-reviewed

Supreme Court is not inclined to hear Chandigarh's petition against case cancellation on AAP leaders
Chandigarh administration challenged high court order scrapping rioting case from 2020 protest
High court found no prima facie case or specific instigation by AAP leaders in the incident

What is the next step for the Chandigarh administration in this case?
New Delhi:

The Supreme Court said it is not inclined to hear the Chandigarh administration's petition objecting to the cancellation of a rioting case filed against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders, including Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, over holding a protest march in 2020 against electricity tariff hike.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohanawas was hearing the Chandigarh administration's challenge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court order, which scrapped the case.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, for Chandigarh, said the administration is facing some technical objections to three cases filed by it, challenging separate orders. Raju then asked for some time to address the matter.

Chief Justice Kant, however, said the bench was not inclined to entertain the challenge.

"Mr Raju, naarebaazi (sloganeering) everyone does it in a democracy. Now that he (Mann) is holding some responsible position, we understand that he will understand his responsibility also. It's alright I think now. If you are going to argue on merits, we will hear you. Otherwise, we are not inclined to interfere," the Chief Justice said.

Raju, however, submitted that a mini trial was conducted by the high court and the entire case was scrapped. He said he would argue on merits. Accordingly, the bench adjourned the matter.

In the order, the high court held that no prima facie case existed against the AAP leaders and that the alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were not made out. The court scrapped the first information report (FIR) and the chargesheet filed under Sections 147 (rioting), 149 (unlawful assembly), 332 (causing hurt to a public servant), and 353 (assault).

The high court had said, "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. Therefore, there is no basis to ascribe the alleged act of throwing stones by the mob to the petitioners."

"It is a case where no act, voluntary or otherwise, has been attributed to the petitioners. Instead, the allegations are that on shooting mild water on the mob they started throwing stones which hit the officials present there."

The court on merits found no material showing any act by the petitioners and no prohibitory order under Section 144 of the CrPC existed, so the gathering was not unlawful. It was also noted that the chargesheet mentioned the petitioners and 750-800 people were yet to be identified for a supplementary challan.

No specific instigation, words or gestures were attributed to the petitioners and the injuries appeared to be a result of shoving during crowd movement, not deliberate assault, the court said. The order pointed out stone-throwing allegedly began only after the duty magistrate ordered water to be sprayed on the crowd.

Got a follow‑up question on this article? Go on

How may i help you today

Show full article

Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world