Supreme Court not inclined to revive 2020 rioting case against Mann, other AAP leaders

3 min readNew DelhiJul 16, 2026 09:06 PM IST

The Bench adjourned the hearing after Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, on behalf of the Chandigarh administration, submitted that they will argue the matter on merits and sought time to address technical objections in the three separate petitions filed against different high court orders. (File Photo)

The Supreme Court on Thursday indicated that it was not inclined to entertain a plea by the Chandigarh Administration challenging a Punjab and Haryana High Court verdict quashing a rioting case against Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and other AAP leaders over a 2020 protest.

A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant orally observed that everyone does “naarebaazi (sloganeering”) in a democracy. “Now that he (Mann) is holding some responsible position, we understand that he will understand his responsibility also. If you are going to argue on merits, we will hear you. Otherwise, we are not inclined to interfere,” the bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, observed.

The Bench adjourned the hearing after Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, on behalf of the Chandigarh administration, submitted that they will argue the matter on merits and sought time to address technical objections in the three separate petitions filed against different high court orders.

The Chandigarh Administration has challenged a November 2025 judgement of the high court that set aside the FIR and chargesheet against Mann and other AAP leaders over a protest against a hike in electricity tariff in 2020. The FIR had invoked Sections 147 (rioting), 149 (unlawful assembly), 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter a public servant from duty), and 353 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharge of duty) of the IPC.

Quashing the Fir and the chargesheet, the HC held that the material on record did not disclose a prima facie case against the petitioners. “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 pelting stones which hit the officials present there,” the high court had observed.

The HC also noted that no prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC was in force at the site. The chargesheet itself said that the petitioners and hundreds of other participants were yet to be identified for a supplementary challan. “The immediate trigger for the mob turning furious and behaving the way it did appears to be shooting of water on them as per orders of the Duty Magistrate,” the HC said.

It further observed that stone pelting began only after that and the injuries to police personnel were consistent with jostling in the crowd rather than a deliberate attack.

Story continues below this ad

The FIR was registered in 2020 on the complaint of police constable Manpreet Kaur who alleged that AAP leaders including Mann, Harpal Singh Cheema, Gurmeet Singh Meet Hayer, Baljinder Kaur, Aman Arora led protesters toward the Punjab CM’s residence in Chandigarh. Police said the crowd attempted to breach barricades and later resorted to stone pelting.