Delhi Police used force on student protesters; Rahul Gandhi demands Amit Shah's accountability

On July 20, 2026, Delhi Police took action against student protesters participating in the Cockroach Janta Party's 'Sansad Chalo' march, resulting in clashes and allegations of use of force including pellet-like injuries. The incident occurred at Jantar Mantar in central Delhi and quickly became a flashpoint for broader questions about police conduct during student protests. At least three identified protesters—Sheikh Irshad Mansuri, Sahil Lochab, and a 28-year-old reporter—filed complaints citing pellet injuries, with hospital records documenting injuries consistent with such weapons. One protester stated, 'I couldn't feel my arm' after the incident. The clashes resulted in injuries on both sides, though the focus of subsequent political discourse centered on allegations of excessive police force against unarmed student demonstrators.

The constitutional and legal context is critical here. India's Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peacefully and petition the government (Articles 19 and 32). The use of force by police during protests is governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure and guidelines established by the Supreme Court in various judgments. The Supreme Court has held that peaceful protest is a fundamental democratic right and that police action must be proportionate and avoid gratuitous use of force. The Delhi Police's conduct during the July 20 incident raised questions about adherence to these established principles. IPS officer Abhinav Kumar subsequently wrote an opinion piece in The Hindu analyzing lessons from the Jantar Mantar protests for police conduct and institutional learning.

On July 26, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi wrote an official letter to Home Minister Amit Shah demanding accountability and asking specifically whether Shah had approved the use of 'lethal force' on student protesters. Gandhi's letter framed the police action as a 'barbaric assault' on peaceful demonstrators and questioned whether the use of such force was authorized at ministerial level. The letter became part of broader parliamentary discourse when the new session resumed, with Congress MPs raising questions about police accountability and the government's response to legitimate democratic protest. The demand for accountability extended to questions about whether the police action was an overreaction or a deliberate strategy to suppress student activism.

For exam purposes, this story tests understanding of: Constitutional rights (Articles 19, 21, 32), police powers and their limitations, principles of proportionality in state action, ministerial accountability in parliamentary democracy, and the evolving nature of student activism in India. Mains questions could ask: 'Examine the balance between state security and citizen rights during protest' or 'Analyze the constitutional framework governing police conduct.' Prelims will test dates, names, and specific allegations. This also reflects broader Gen-Z political consciousness and the changing dynamics of student movements in the 2020s.