The Supreme Court of India on July 30, 2026 issued formal notice to Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and other AAP leaders, agreeing to examine a Special Leave Petition filed by the Chandigarh Administration challenging the quashing of a 2020 rioting FIR.
The bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan directed the respondents to reply after Additional Solicitor General SV Raju argued the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s reasoning was “perverse,” according to Bar & Bench.
Background: How We Got Here
The dispute traces back to January 10, 2020, when AAP workers and leaders — including then-party leader Bhagwant Mann — organised a protest in Chandigarh against a hike in electricity tariffs.
Around 750–800 AAP workers attempted to march towards the residence of the then Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh. Police stopped them; protesters allegedly pelted stones, injuring police personnel, according to ProKerala.
An FIR was registered at Police Station North Sector 3, Chandigarh, on the complaint of Constable Manpreet Kaur, who alleged that senior AAP leaders including Mann incited workers to march towards the Chief Minister’s residence, as reported by LiveLaw.
The FIR invoked the following IPC sections:
- Section 147 IPC — Rioting
- Section 149 IPC — Unlawful assembly
- Section 332 IPC — Voluntarily causing hurt to deter a public servant from duty
- Section 353 IPC — Assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharge of duty
Section 188 IPC — disobedience to a duly promulgated order — was subsequently deleted from the FIR, per ProKerala.
On November 29, 2025, Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya of the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed the FIR and chargesheet against Mann and the other AAP leaders in the case titled Bhagwant Mann and Another v. UT Chandigarh, according to India Legal Live and Bar & Bench.
The High Court held that no prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC were in force at the time of the protest. It further noted that none of the stone-pelters had been identified, and that there was no allegation that Mann or the other petitioners had instigated the violence.
The Chandigarh Administration challenged this order before the Supreme Court. The matter was first listed before the Supreme Court bench on May 22, 2026, but was adjourned, according to Bar & Bench’s litigation report.
On July 16, 2026, the Supreme Court orally indicated it was not inclined to entertain the petition. CJI Surya Kant remarked, “Mr Raju, naarebaazi (sloganeering)… everyone does it in democracy.” However, the hearing was deferred to July 30 after ASG Raju insisted on arguing the merits, per Tribune India.
At a subsequent hearing on July 22, 2026, the bench observed, “There is no allegation that he exhorted the crowd (of protesters),” according to Tribune India.
Named respondents in the SLP — captioned U.T. Chandigarh v. Bhagwant Mann and Anr. — include Bhagwant Mann, Aman Arora, Daljit Singh Cheema, and Maheshinder Singh Grewal, as reported by ProKerala.
The Ruling — Key Findings
On July 30, 2026, after hearing arguments from ASG SV Raju for the Chandigarh Administration, the Supreme Court bench agreed to formally examine the matter and issued notice to all named respondents, according to Bar & Bench and LiveLaw.
The bench’s brief order was encapsulated in its words: “We will examine it. Issue notice.” — Supreme Court bench, per Bar & Bench.
ASG Raju pressed the court with a structured argument challenging the High Court’s decision, contending: “Unlawful assembly was there admittedly. Accused was present. Named in the FIR. Unlawful assembly indulged in violence, injuries caused to police officers. Prima facie offence made out.” — ASG SV Raju, as reported by LiveLaw.
Raju also characterised the High Court’s reasoning in starker terms, stating: “The reasoning in the order is perverse.” — ASG SV Raju, per Bar & Bench.
The Supreme Court, by issuing notice, has not stayed the High Court’s quashing order. The matter remains pending final adjudication, and no merits ruling has been delivered.
Separately, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had also quashed a 2021 FIR against AAP MLA Aman Arora and others in connection with a protest rally against the Lakhimpur Kheri incident, according to Bar & Bench.
Reactions & What’s Next
The Chandigarh Administration, represented by ASG SV Raju — with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta having appeared at an earlier hearing — has maintained that the High Court erred in quashing the criminal proceedings without properly weighing the evidence of unlawful assembly and police injuries.
The matter is now pending before the Supreme Court bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan, with respondents directed to file their replies. No next hearing date has been confirmed in the sources available at the time of publication.
More legal news at The Courtroom.
What was the 2020 FIR against Bhagwant Mann about?
The FIR was registered at Police Station North Sector 3, Chandigarh, arising from a January 10, 2020 AAP protest against an electricity tariff hike. Around 750–800 workers attempted to march to the then-Punjab CM Amarinder Singh’s residence. Protesters allegedly pelted stones and injured police personnel. The FIR invoked Sections 147, 149, 332, and 353 IPC, among others.
Why did the Punjab and Haryana High Court quash the FIR?
Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya of the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed the FIR on November 29, 2025, holding that no prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC were in force at the time of the protest. The court also found that none of the stone-pelters were identified and that there was no specific allegation that Mann or the other accused leaders had instigated the violence.
Who is representing the Chandigarh Administration before the Supreme Court?
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju is appearing for the Chandigarh Administration before the Supreme Court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had also appeared for the Administration at an earlier hearing in the matter, according to Bar & Bench.
Who are the named respondents in the Supreme Court SLP?
The named respondents in the SLP — captioned U.T. Chandigarh v. Bhagwant Mann and Anr. — include Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, Aman Arora, Daljit Singh Cheema, and Maheshinder Singh Grewal, as reported by ProKerala.
Disclaimer
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change or vary by case — consult a qualified lawyer before acting. The Courtroom is not liable for any reliance on this content.
