Three days after several videos of police using disproportionate force, including pellet guns, against unarmed men and women during the July 20 march to Parliament emerged on social media, the Delhi Police and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had yet to issue a statement or clarify their position.
Though Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Thursday (July 23, 2026) that “a series of steps for safeguarding the interests of students” were being taken, there was no assurance from the government on probing the “police excesses” against the protesters.
On Wednesday (July 22), the Delhi High Court sought responses from the Centre and the Delhi Police on public interest litigation petitions alleging the excessive use of force against demonstrators during the July 20 march to Parliament called by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) to demand the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Another case seeking an investigation into the CJP protest is listed for hearing on Friday (July 24).
The court also instructed the authorities to preserve all material connected to the police action, including CCTV footage and any video recordings of the incident. Over 100 police and Rapid Action Force (RAF) personnel were also injured in the incident.
The Hindu reported about two persons, who were hit by pellets allegedly fired by RAF personnel, being operated upon at government hospitals. One of them, Sahil Lochab (19), risks losing vision in the right eye due to a pellet piercing his pupil, his family said.
On Wednesday (July 22), Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (ADCP) Sandeep Lamba, who was seen in a video slapping a woman on July 20, was removed from protest-related duties around Jantar Mantar and sent to north-east Delhi, his original place of posting.
Another video showed a police officer allegedly molesting a woman with a wooden stick.
Huge push
Recounting the July 20 incident, Eenesh (26), a resident of Chhattisgarh, who was among the first ones to be injured in police action near Jantar Mantar, said, “none of the protesters attacked the police. There were thousands of people in that small protest area which was blocked by high barricades. I was in the front when a huge push came from behind. Several people fell on the ground toppling the barricades. That is when the police started hitting us with batons. I saw 200 people being injured by police lathis.” Mr. Eenesh has been in Delhi since June 20 when the CJP protest started. He was on a hunger strike for seven days and continues to stay at the protest site with a bandaged wrist and knee. He refuted the police claim that protesters threw bricks at them. “You look around Jantar Mantar, there are no places where people could find loose rocks to throw at police. There was no space even to move,” Mr. Eenesh told The Hindu.
During the hearing before the Delhi High Court on Wednesday, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for petitioner Umesh Kumar, said he had personally examined around 130 videos of the July 20 protest, which, according to him, showed widespread use of force by personnel purportedly belonging to the police.
He alleged that a large number of those deployed were either not in proper police uniform or, even if in uniform, were not wearing name badges, making it impossible to ascertain their identity. He further claimed that several personnel were carrying lathis and “shock-producing batons”, which, he argued, were not part of the standard equipment prescribed for the Delhi Police or the Rapid Action Force (RAF).
Referring to one of the videos placed before the court, Mr. Sankaranarayanan specifically named Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police Sandeep Lamba, alleging that the officer was seen slapping a woman who was standing on the roadside and was not participating in any act of violence.
“The videos show specifically, Mr. Lamba slapping a woman, who was standing innocently on the side and doing nothing. She is not moving, I show the video. Let us not be scared to name our thugs in uniform, when they deserve to be named. He should be summoned here (court) and asked to be accountable to his actions,” he said.
“There was no heat, no crowd or fury, completely unprovoked. He walks in past the woman, he reaches and slaps her across the face. These are the people we put in charge of our police force to protect us. That is why we are before this court,” Mr. Sankaranarayanan said.
The Senior Advovate contended that if constitutional courts failed to intervene against such instances of alleged police excess, it would effectively amount to granting law enforcement a licence to act with impunity.
“These kind of excessive force, if the constitutional courts do not step in and stem, it is a licence to the police that they will just get away with anything since they have the sanction of their political masters,” he said.
Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, also appearing for the petitioner, alleged that women protesters had been molested during the police action. “There are police officers who are molesting women using batons in their private parts if I may say so. It so ghastly,” he said. He submitted that police officers identifiable in the videos as having committed cognisable offences should face immediate registration of FIRs.
The senior advocates sought directions for the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), registration of FIRs against the policemen allegedly involved, departmental action against them, and a judicial inquiry into the incidents.
Published – July 24, 2026 02:14 am IST
