Sanjay Singh Files Privilege Motion Against Police Commissioner Over Alleged Assault During Peaceful Marches Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh has moved the Rajya Sabha Privileges Committee against the Delhi Police Commissioner, alleging physical assault and detention during three separate protests within eleven days. Tensions between law enforcement agencies and opposition lawmakers in the national capital have escalated significantly following allegations of repeated physical mistreatment during peaceful demonstrations. Sanjay Singh, a senior leader of the Aam Aadmi Party and the head of its parliamentary delegation in the Upper House, has initiated formal proceedings against senior security leadership over alleged excessive use of force, rough handling, and high-handed detentions. The parliamentarian formally submitted a breach of privilege and contempt notice, alongside supplementary submissions, to Harivansh, the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha who presides over the Committee of Privileges. The motion seeks immediate accountability from the Delhi Police Commissioner and field personnel for allegedly violating the constitutional status and dignity of an elected lawmaker. Three Instances of Physical Confrontation in Eleven Days In his official representation, the lawmaker documented a chronological account of three distinct confrontations occurring between October 2, 2026, and October 12, 2026. The submission highlights that subjecting a sitting member of the Rajya Sabha to aggressive physical restraint three times in less than a fortnight exceeds conventional crowd management protocols and reflects an intent to humiliate an elected representative. The initial episode transpired on October 2, 2026, coinciding with Gandhi Jayanti. Demonstrators had organized a non-violent foot march toward Jantar Mantar to challenge the extensive deletion of names from electoral rolls and the perceived suppression of civic rights. According to the complaint, personnel intercepted the march, threw the lawmaker to the ground, dragged him along the tarmac, and forcibly shoved him inside a waiting transport van. A second altercation took place on October 10, 2026, amid demonstrations raising concerns about the functioning of election machinery and administrative discrepancies. As political leaders stepped out following the demonstration, security staff reportedly prevented them from walking naturally, grabbing the lawmaker and pulling him aggressively into a detention vehicle. The third encounter unfolded on October 12, 2026, in the vicinity of Janpath metro station, Parliament Street, and the adjoining Jantar Mantar perimeter. The protest was convened to flag widespread anomalies in the Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls. During this confrontation, personnel reportedly resorted to severe physical force once again, gripping the parliamentarian by the neck, pulling him forcefully, and thrusting him inside a detention bus. Constitutional Safeguards and the Right to Dissent The memorandum submitted to the parliamentary panel stresses that dragging a public representative across the street and physically shoving him into security transports cannot be brushed aside under the guise of regular policing. The petition contends that these repeated confrontations undermine democratic traditions and constitute a severe contempt of the legislature. Reflecting on the incidents through a video address, Sanjay Singh insisted that non-violent assembly and raising civic grievances are fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen. Addressing the central leadership directly, he asserted, ‘We are not terrorists, we are not goons, we are not mafia.’ He added that the right to contest injustice and protect democratic foundations was secured through the sacrifices of historical figures and explicitly enshrined by Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar in the Constitution. Lack of Administrative Communication and Legal Recourse The lawmaker also directed sharp criticism at the top echelon of the capital's police administration. He stated that throughout the unfolding altercations, he made continuous personal attempts to communicate with the Police Commissioner via repeated phone calls and written messages. However, the senior officer neither answered the calls nor offered any explanation. Singh argued that as the operational head of the force, the commissioner holds direct accountability for the actions of personnel on the ground. Expressing deep resentment against the station house officer of Jafarpur Kalan and other personnel involved, the MP signaled that the dispute would not remain confined to legislative forums alone. He stated that alongside the findings of the Privileges Committee, formal criminal complaints would be pursued against the offending officials. In the event that departmental authorities decline to lodge complaints against their own personnel, the matter will be taken before the courts to seek judicial directions for appropriate action. Irregularities in the Detention of Female Protesters A significant portion of the petition placed before the parliamentary body focuses on the treatment meted out to women detainees during these operations. The notice indicates that following the events of October 10, 2026, when protesters were transported to the Jafarpur Kalan facility, multiple female journalists, students, and social activists were held on the premises. The MP noted that despite immediate interventions highlighting mandatory legal safeguards governing women in police custody, the female demonstrators were kept at the station until late evening. The petition invokes the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, which lay down stringent restrictions regarding the detention and arrest of women between sunset and sunrise. The complaint demands an independent inquiry into these procedural lapses, asking the police leadership to clarify the legal jurisdiction and justification under which female protesters were detained past sunset. What this means for you This dispute brings the legal boundaries of police conduct and civil assembly back into sharp public focus. • Civil liberties and dissent: Scrutiny over crowd-control measures ensures greater emphasis on preserving the right to peaceful protest across India. Legal clarity on high-handed policing sets precedents that shield ordinary demonstrators from arbitrary physical restraint. • Safeguards for female detainees: The issue highlights statutory protections under the BNSS 2023 restricting the detention of women past sunset. Tighter compliance audits will pressure police departments to enforce custody guidelines strictly. • Accountability of law enforcement: Privilege motions compel senior officers to explain aggressive field conduct before parliamentary panels. This increases oversight over administrative brass when dealing with elected representatives and civilian rallies. • Electoral transparency: Concerns raised regarding the Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls will prompt heightened public verification of enrollment records. Voters across affected constituencies will become more active in ensuring their names remain on official lists. Why this happened The situation developed following a sequence of opposition-led street protests against alleged electoral discrepancies that met with aggressive police intervention. • Grievances over voter registration: Opposition leaders organized demonstrations challenging voter deletions and procedures linked to the Special Intensive Revision. Rallies convened on October 2, October 10, and October 12, 2026, near Parliament Street and Jantar Mantar. • Escalation during crowd containment: Security units assigned to the area repeatedly used physical restraint, dragging and shoving the sitting lawmaker during detentions. The intensity of force applied against an elected representative triggered institutional outrage. • Breakdown of official communication: The refusal or failure of the Police Commissioner to respond to the MP's direct phone calls and messages intensified the grievance. With no immediate explanation offered by administrative heads, formal legislative recourse became inevitable. • Custody protocol lapses: Holding female activists, journalists, and students past sunset at Jafarpur Kalan police station raised statutory non-compliance questions under the BNSS 2023. This procedural violation transformed a standard street dispute into a serious legal inquiry. Questions & Answers 1. Against whom did Sanjay Singh file the privilege notice? He submitted the breach of privilege notice before the Rajya Sabha Committee of Privileges against the Delhi Police Commissioner and related police personnel. 2. Which specific dates of confrontations are cited in the complaint? The petition details three specific incidents occurring on October 2, October 10, and October 12, 2026, during public demonstrations. 3. What issues prompted the demonstrations led by the Aam Aadmi Party? The demonstrations were organized to oppose mass voter roll deletions, procedural flaws in the Special Intensive Revision, and election machinery functioning. 4. What concern was raised regarding female demonstrators? The complaint alleges that women journalists and students were unlawfully kept at Jafarpur Kalan police station past sunset in violation of BNSS 2023 norms. 5. What legal step will be pursued if the police refuse to register an FIR? Sanjay Singh stated that if police authorities fail to file complaints against offending officers, he will approach the court for judicial orders. https://trendkia.com/en/delhi/snsada-marga-para-dhakka-mukki-aura-badasaluki-ke-khilapha-sanjay-singh-pahunche-visheshadhikara-samiti-police-commissioner-para-a-47374 TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.