The Delhi High Court has asked the Union government and the Delhi Police to respond to public interest litigation petitions alleging excessive police force during a July 20 Parliament march called by the Cockroach Janta Party. The case matters because it raises questions on the constitutional right to protest, police accountability, and the preservation of evidence for judicial review.

The petitions allege that police used force against students and other protesters during the march and that the allegations could not be treated as isolated incidents. The High Court directed that CCTV and video footage connected to the march be preserved, which is important because video evidence can help courts assess the conduct of both protesters and police personnel.

According to the petitioners, some people in plain clothes carried lathis, including nail-studded lathis, electric batons, and pellet guns. The petitioners also alleged that women protesters were molested and sought FIRs against identifiable officers as well as a high-level inquiry.

Another counsel told the court that many personnel were deployed without nameplates and used unauthorised batons. The government’s counsel said the protest had turned violent and that police personnel were injured, while the petitioners maintained that the police response was unjustified and brutal. The case therefore raises a familiar constitutional and governance question: how far the State may use force during public assemblies and what safeguards should exist against abuse.

Background and earlier position

Public protest in India is protected by the constitutional scheme of Article 19(1)(a) and Article 19(1)(b), but those freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order and related concerns. Police action during demonstrations is therefore expected to remain necessary, proportionate, and accountable.

Related current affairs