In a comprehensive affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, Delhi Police has presented its stance on the security action taken during the July 20 student protest and attempted Parliament march. Rebuffing allegations of using excessive physical force against demonstrators, the police administration clarified that law enforcement personnel acted strictly in response to an escalating situation to maintain public order. The formal submission was made ahead of the apex court hearing, detailing the complete sequence of events, force deployment, and security challenges encountered on that day.
Crowd Scale and Initial Security Deployment
According to the official document, an estimated crowd of 30,000 individuals had gathered at Jantar Mantar and adjacent streets on July 20. The large assembly was spread across a expansive radius of nearly 3 kilometers, posing complex crowd management demands. To maintain order and secure sensitive government zones, approximately 5,000 police personnel were positioned across the location. Delhi Police noted that while the gathering was initially peaceful, tension escalated when sections of the crowd forcibly breached security barricades set up at multiple security points and advanced toward the Parliament building. This breach led to direct confrontations and physical altercations between the crowd and security officers.
Casualties and Individuals with Prior Criminal History
The ensuing confrontation resulted in physical injuries on both sides. Delhi Police stated that over 240 police and security personnel sustained injuries during the clashes, while around 200 protesters were also injured. Law enforcement emphasized that physical measures were not executed abruptly or harshly, but were applied incrementally and proportionately in direct response to crowd resistance.
A critical point highlighted in the affidavit is the presence of individuals with established criminal backgrounds within the demonstration. According to police data, approximately 2,873 persons present in the crowd had prior criminal cases registered against them, involving major offenses such as murder, attempted murder, robbery, rape, and charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. A dedicated Special Investigation Team (SIT) created by Delhi Police is actively investigating the presence and actions of these individuals during the event.
Absence of March Authorization and Rebuttal of Evidence Claims
Delhi Police explicitly informed the Supreme Court that no administrative permission was granted to the organizers or participants for marching toward the Parliament complex. Consequently, attempting to break safety perimeters and move toward Parliament was unauthorized and unlawful. Addressing the allegations contained in various public petitions, police argued that those claims relied on selective imagery, incomplete video segments, and unverified social media assertions, which fail to present the full and authentic context of the law enforcement response.
Nailed Sticks, Plainclothes Deployment, and Surveillance Tools
Responding to accusations regarding the presence of sticks with sharp nails during the incident, Delhi Police provided a factual clarification. The affidavit explained that video footage depicting a nailed wooden stick showed it being carried by a protester, not a police officer. The object was identified as a wooden pole used to support a national flag. Police reaffirmed that baton usage to hold back advancing crowds complied strictly with established standard operating protocols, noting that several officers were directly targeted by aggressive elements.
Regarding plainclothes personnel seen at the venue, police stated that officers from the Special Branch, Special Cell, Crime Branch, and local police stations were deployed in civilian clothing to gather real-time intelligence and monitor crowd dynamics. Such tactical arrangements are standard practice during large-scale public assemblies. Additionally, the use of Facial Recognition Software was described as a necessary and targeted technical measure appropriate for high-security environments.
Position on Independent Judicial Inquiry
Concluding its submission, Delhi Police informed the Supreme Court that if the bench decides to constitute an independent committee to review the policing measures and use of force during the protest, the police administration is fully prepared to cooperate with the inquiry.
