The Supreme Court of India has an extraordinary role and duty under the Constitution of India. It is a Constitutional Court and protector of the Fundamental Rights of the Citizens. Article 32 obliges the Court to intervene and grant relief in case citizens' fundamental rights are violated . During Constituent Assembly debates,Dr Ambedkar emphasised its importance saying," If I was asked to name any particular article in this Constitution as the most important -an article without which this Constitution would be a nullity- I could not refer to any other article except this one. It is the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it, and I am glad that the House has realised its importance ."

Then why did the Supreme Court decline to intervene and protect the fundamental rights of thousands of young students who were severely beaten by the Police and some miscreants permitted by the police when a lawyer sought its intervention on July 22nd? The Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heading the Bench with Justices Bagchi and Mohana, commented, " Don't waste our time and don't waste your time" and "we are not interested in videos, we don't have time to watch

So Ambedkar's words have lost their significance in 2026 ? Is the Court distancing itself from its core duty ? Or is the Court simply not willing to act against the Modi govt ?

The Court needs to be reminded of the importance of Fundamental Rights as stressed by Dr Ambedkar during debates, calling them “the greatest safeguards that can be provided for the safety and security of the individual."

He said, “The object of the Fundamental Rights is twofold. First, that every citizen must be in a position to claim those rights. Secondly, they must be binding upon every authority."

The Court has a very inconsistent approach in this area. It calls itself the protector of fundamental Rights, and has deemed as its duty to grant relief in case of violation of such rights if prima facie a case is shown, however laudable the object of authority may be, as was held in the Romesh Thapar case in 1950 and Daryao case in 1961. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is another hallmark of the court and it has even held that when it is apprised of violations of those rights of a group of people, it must set aside all procedural shackles and hear such petitions to remedy miseries of people as held in Ramsharan Autyanuprasi case in 1989.

Interestingly, the Supreme Court always intervenes to protect its own Judges from Police atrocities as it did when a Magistrate in Nadiad was ill-treated, issuing a contempt notice and ordering various reliefs and directions, including suspension of the police inspector in 1991. Again in 1994-95, it issued urgent directions for deploying para-military force in the premises of Allahabad High Court when the police force went berserk and attacked Judges and Lawyers on September 13, 1994 and followed it by ordering CBI inquiry.

Chief Justice Kant may wish away criticism against the Court and himself, but there is a strong basis for the criticism. And it is intended to better the Justice delivery, not thwart it. So it is inexplicable that a Bench presided over by him can move with lightning speed against NCERT textbooks for a just chapter on the state of Judiciary, directing stoppage of publication and distribution as also suspension of officers, but decides not to find time to protect young Indians who are simply clamouring for better administration of higher education and action against NEET culprits. They want, and rightly so, accountability at the highest levels of the government because such frauds have taken place at regular intervals, destroying the lives of thousands of young students and the lives of many .

Has the nation ever paused to think as to why every child of a person in power, be it politician, bureaucrat, police officer, judge amongst others, gets the best education, best jobs – many in foreign countries – but children of common citizens have to struggle so hard to come up?

Our education system is archaic and needs a complete overhaul to suit the current needs of the nation in modern times. Then only th Youth can be gainfully employed. Today, tens of millions are waiting for jobs.

CJP was the brain child of the Chief Justice himself, who made extremely insensitive statements about India's Gen Z, who sadly happen to be unemployed thanks to those in power . He must be reminded of what the SC had ordained in 1950 .

“This Court is thus constituted the protector and guarantor of fundamental rights, and it cannot, consistently with the responsibility so laid upon it, refuse to entertain applications seeking protection against infringements of such rights.”

Though Delhi High Court issued notice on petitions questioning the police action against the protesters, it did not deem it necessary to give an urgent listing, and granted a long adjournment, posting the matters to September. Former Chief Justice PD Desai, a role model for independent and bold judges, would have listed the matters the next day.

India is looking up to the judiciary to protect its democracy, democratic values, Constitution, constitutional morality and the rule of law. Let us hope it acts to do so!

Dushyant Dave is Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, and Former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

Also read - One Court, Two Eras : Judicial Approaches To Ramlila Maidan Incident & Student Protest Crackdown