CJI Surya Kant promises justice to youth; Supreme Court doors open 24x7 during crisis

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant made significant public statements on July 25, 2026, addressing concerns of student protesters engaged in sustained agitation over examination paper leaks and governance failures. The CJI unequivocally stated: "The doors of the Supreme Court are open 24 hours a day for every citizen. The court will not allow injustice to prevail." This represents an exceptional judicial intervention during a constitutional crisis, where the highest court openly commits to immediate accessibility and swift justice. The statement directly responds to student allegations of delayed justice and institutional apathy.

The Supreme Court has been hearing petitions challenging alleged police excesses against student protesters at Jantar Mantar (Delhi) and other locations. These petitions raise concerns about: (1) Disproportionate police force including tear gas and allegedly pellet injuries; (2) Arbitrary internet shutdowns in protest areas; (3) Mass arrests and detention of student leaders and activists; (4) Denial of fundamental rights (Articles 19, 21). CJI Kant's statement acknowledges the Court's constitutional duty to protect citizens' rights during civil unrest and commits to expedited hearing of such matters. The reference to 24-hour accessibility is extraordinary, suggesting the Court will establish special benches for urgent hearings.

Key judicial positions: The Court has also been monitoring compliance with constitutional norms by police forces. CJI Kant clarified earlier statements about "cockroach remarks" were directed only at fraudulent degree holders, not at students generally—a response to widespread misunderstandings. The Supreme Court's assertive stance represents the judiciary's role as ultimate guardian of constitutional rights, particularly when executive actions (police conduct, administrative decisions) potentially breach fundamental rights during protest situations. Multiple High Courts have also been hearing related petitions challenging internet shutdowns and police conduct.

Exam relevance is critical: This demonstrates: (1) Separation of powers—judiciary checking executive excess; (2) Fundamental rights protections during civil unrest; (3) Judicial activism in protecting protest rights (Article 19(1)(b)); (4) Balance between maintaining order and protecting freedoms; (5) Role of courts in constitutional crises. UPSC questions could address: When does police action breach Article 21? How do courts balance public order with protest rights? What is judicial review's scope during constitutional emergencies? This exemplifies the living Constitution concept.