New Delhi, August 3: Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) chief spokesperson Saurav Das on Monday welcomed the Supreme Court's clarification regarding the withdrawal and closure of FIRs against students and protesters, describing it as a "major victory" for the country's youth.

Addressing reporters, Das said the apex court had clarified that states, including Delhi, were free to withdraw FIRs, close cases, or file closure reports through the legal procedures available to them.

"Today marks yet another major victory for the students and young people of this country. The Supreme Court has clarified that states, including Delhi and others, are at liberty to withdraw FIRs, close them, or file closure reports through any legally permissible process," he said.

Das also highlighted the court's clarification on the term "criminal antecedents," stating that it would apply only to individuals accused of grave offences such as murder and rape. According to him, this would protect students and peaceful protesters, including those who had participated in political demonstrations, from facing future legal hurdles.

"This is a significant relief for regular students and protesters. Those who have taken part in political protests in the past will not face unnecessary legal complications, and FIRs against them can be closed. It is a major victory," he added.

He further said the Supreme Court had indicated during the hearing that it could invoke its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure "complete justice" by quashing FIRs registered in different states.

"We are awaiting the written order. However, based on the oral observations made by the judges, we welcome the clarification. It is a major victory for students across the country," Das said.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana clarified that its July 28 order allowing prosecution of protesters with "criminal antecedents" was intended to apply only to those facing accusations of serious and heinous crimes. The court emphasised that the expression should be interpreted in this limited context.

The clarification came during the hearing of a batch of petitions related to the alleged use of force by police against students protesting examination paper leaks during a Parliament march on July 20.

The march, organised by the CJP after weeks of protests and a hunger strike at Jantar Mantar, drew thousands of students demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over examination paper leaks and seeking broader reforms to the examination system.

As protesters attempted to move towards Parliament and breached police barricades in central Delhi, security personnel used tear gas shells and carried out a lathi-charge to disperse the crowd. Several videos circulating on social media purportedly showed protesters being manhandled by police.

Delhi Police, however, maintained that force was used only after sections of the crowd allegedly turned violent and resorted to stone-pelting.