Delhi Police Deny 'Excessive Force' Allegations in Supreme Court Affidavit Over Jantar Mantar Student Protest
NEW DELHI: In a counter-affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Delhi Police rejected allegations of using excessive force against student demonstrators during the July 20 protest march from Jantar Mantar toward Parliament. The affidavit, submitted by Deputy Commissioner of Police Sachin Sharma in response to multiple petitions seeking a court-monitored investigation, maintained that security personnel deployed strictly proportionate and graded force after the agitation turned violent.
According to the police department asserted that no official permission had been granted for the march toward Parliament, classifying the gathering as an unlawful assembly.
Key Submissions Detailed in the Police Affidavit
The counter-affidavit submitted before the apex court highlighted several operational and security factors regarding the July 20 law-and-order response:
- Deployment and Scale of Protesters: Security agencies reported that approximately 5,000 police personnel were deployed along a 3-kilometer stretch to manage a crowd exceeding 30,000 protesters led by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).
- Breach of Barricades: The affidavit noted that while the demonstration began peacefully, the situation escalated after sections of the crowd breached multiple layers of barricades in an attempt to march toward Parliament House.
- Casualty and Injury Figures: According to official records cited in the filing, over 240 police personnel and uniformed officers and around 200 members of the public and student demonstrators sustained injuries during the clashes.
- Infiltration Claims: Law enforcement agencies argued that the crowd was infiltrated by history-sheeters and anti-social elements who incited violence against police personnel without provocation.
- Rejection of Unverified Visual Material: The Delhi Police cautioned against relying on unverified social media clips, arguing that petitions used selective video snippets and photographs that failed to represent the lawful actions taken on the ground.
Rejection of Weapon Misuse Charges
Addressing specific allegations regarding the use of unauthorized riot-control gear and lathis fitted with nails, the police clarified that digital evidence showed a stick with a national flag attached carried by a protester, rather than a police-issued weapon. The administration reiterated that lathis remain standard permissible equipment utilized for crowd control under statutory police manuals.
"All measures were taken strictly in accordance with permissible modes of controlling violence and managing illegal assemblies under active public safety protocols," stated the Delhi Police affidavit before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is expected to review the counter-affidavit along with connected petitions in upcoming judicial hearings.