A bench of justices B S Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar passed the direction while expressing the view that "there seems to be some contradictions" on the photographs appearing in the print media and the video clippings before it on the protest relating to the black money row.
The apex court said while the reports in the print media indicated that the protesters were beaten up, the video clippings did not indicate so.
The bench asked senior counsel Harish Salve, appearing for the Delhi police, to file its reply on the trust's allegation even as amicus curiae Rajeev Dhawan told the court that the authorities "were less than being candid" on the July 4 midnight incident. Salve, while denying the allegation, assured the court that necessary reply and written submissions would be placed before the bench on the issue.
Dhawan, a senior counsel, said the Delhi police had failed to answer "one crucial question: Where did the order (to crackdown) come from? The city police commissioner or some one higher up?"
The counsel told the bench that "it was baffling" as to why and at whose instance the police had acted against the protesters.
"It was baffling as at whose instance police had acted. Because parallel negotiations were going on," Dhawan told the bench referring to the parleys the yoga guru was holding with four union cabinet ministers prior to the midnight swoop.
The amicus curiae said the police need to establish the claim of "threat perception" and justify the doctrine of "reasonableness and proportionality" in dealing with the protesters.
The apex court, while also permitting the counsel for one of the victims Rajbala to file an affidavit on the incident, posted the matter for further hearing to September 30.
