Mandsaur Farmer Protest Shooting| Supreme Court Issues Notice In Plea Seeking Tabling Of Jain Commission Report Before MP Assembly

The Supreme Court today (March 24) agreed to consider the challenge against the Madhya Pradesh High Court's refusal to direct the production of the Jain Commission Report regarding the 2017 Mandsaur protest shootings before the assembly

The bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice in a plea challenging the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which dismissed a petition seeking tabling of the Jain Commission report on the 2017 Mandsaur farmer shooting incident before the legislative assembly. 

Before the High Court, the petitioner contended that under Section 3(4) of the Commission of Inquiry Act of 1952, the State Government was required to present the findings to the legislative assembly within six months. The petition asked for a writ of mandamus, directing the state to table the report promptly.

S. 3(4) states : (4) The appropriate Government shall cause to be laid before 2[each House of Parliament or, as the case may be, the Legislature of the State], the report, if any, of the Commission on the inquiry made by the Commission under sub-section (1) together with a memorandum of the action taken thereon, within a period of six months of the submission of the report by the Commission to the appropriate Government.

Notably, the High Court in its order had noted (1) no member of the assembly demanded for the report ,as s/he could have done under the settled decisions of the Supreme Court; (2) the upper limit of 6 months for producing the report had lapsed years ago; (3) the 1952 Act does not prescribe any consequences for non-production of such a report within the timeframe of 6 months. 

It also held that the purpose of the inquiry "was to know the circumstances under which the incident took place and to invite suggestions to stop such incident in future. So far as the action taken by the police or the counter action taken by the farmers are concerned, those are subject matter of FIR in which the criminal cases which have been registered by the police." 

The main contentions raised in the SLP by the petitioners are: (1) the principle of 'delays and laches' would not apply in the instance of  PIL, "since the public cause and constitutional right are imperishable much less by the efflux of time"; (2) S.3(4) of the 1952 Act is of a mandatory nature, creating a compulsory obligation on the Government to have the inquiry report tabled in time. 

"High Court did not appreciate that the section 3(4) of the Act creates a mandatory statutory obligation upon the Government to in which the Government utterly failed and therefore was subject to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India." 

In 2017, the farmers of the Mandsaur District started protesting against the price hike and the policies of the Government unfavourable to them. During the agitation on June 6, 2017, police used force to control the farmers which resulted in the death of 5 farmers and injuries in the firing of several others". According to the petitioner, at 12:45 pm, 12 km away from the Mandsaur City at Parasnath Choupaty, police officials opened fire on the protesting farmers in which two of them died.In another place, the firing took place in which 3 farmers died, the plea claimed. The Police claimed that it had fire in self defence.

In response, the state established the "Jain Commission" chaired by Justice J.K. Jain to investigate the circumstances surrounding the firing and whether the force used by the police was reasonable under the prevailing circumstances or not. The Commission delivered its findings to the government on June 13, 2018, but despite the six-year gap, the report was not presented to the Legislative Assembly. 

Appearance : Mr Vivek K Tankha, Senior Advocate with Dr. Sarvam Ritam Khare AoR

Case Details : Paras Saklecha v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. diary no. 1519/2025