New Delhi: The Delhi Police has defended its handling of the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) protest at Jantar Mantar on July 20, telling the Supreme Court that allegations of excessive force present a “one-sided picture” of the events. In a detailed counter-affidavit, the force said its personnel exercised “maximum restraint” and used only the minimum force necessary after the demonstration allegedly escalated into violence.
The police said the protest had initially been permitted as a peaceful demonstration involving around 500-600 participants. However, permission for the proposed march towards Parliament was denied. Despite repeated warnings through loudspeakers, a large crowd breached barricades and damaged public and government property at several locations, including Rail Bhawan, Parliament Street, Connaught Place, Janpath, Tolstoy Marg and Gole Market.
According to the 97-page affidavit, more than 30,000 protesters, including alleged anti-social elements, eventually gathered, creating a rapidly deteriorating law-and-order situation. The police claimed that officers came under direct physical attack, with more than 240 personnel sustaining injuries.
The force said digital evidence showed groups of protesters targeting individual police officers with stones and sticks, dragging them and removing their helmets and protective equipment. It described some attacks as resembling a “mob lynching fashion” and argued that officers on the ground had to make immediate decisions based on the security situation confronting them.
The Delhi Police also urged the Supreme Court not to assess the entire operation solely through selected video clips or media reports. It argued that individual videos may capture isolated incidents without providing the complete context of the confrontation.
Defending the use of lathis, the police described them as permissible protective equipment used for maintaining law and order. It maintained that its primary objective throughout the protest was to prevent further violence and protect Parliament and other vital installations.
Police defends facial recognition use
The affidavit also addressed criticism over the use of facial recognition technology and biometric surveillance during the demonstrations. The police said the technology was used to identify individuals with previous criminal records rather than automatically create profiles of ordinary protesters.
Between July 20 and 26, the system reportedly generated facial matches for 2,873 individuals corresponding to existing criminal records. Of these, police said 92 were allegedly involved in more than 10 criminal cases, while 47 had reportedly been declared history-sheeters. The force said such matches were subsequently verified by personnel on the ground.
The police further highlighted the deployment of more than 4,600 women personnel during the six days of demonstrations, saying the arrangement was intended to ensure the safety and dignity of women participating in the protests.
The affidavit was filed in response to petitions seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged crackdown. The Delhi Police maintained that the petitions were based on disputed facts and incomplete accounts, asserting that its actions were taken in good faith and within the law.
The July 20 protest was organised as a “Chalo Sansad” march against alleged irregularities in the NEET examination and included demands for the resignation of then Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The protests continued for several days and ultimately preceded Pradhan’s resignation on July 25.
