A building collapsed in Delhi's Satya Niketan area near Moti Bagh on Sunday afternoon, with several people feared trapped beneath the debris, prompting a major rescue operation by emergency services.

The incident was reported at around 1:30 pm near Shiv Mandir in Satya Niketan, in South-West Delhi. Delhi Fire Services and police teams reached the location after receiving information about the collapse and began efforts to search the rubble for survivors. 

Rescue teams deployed at collapse site

The Delhi Fire Department pressed multiple fire tenders into service following the incident. The rescue operation was launched immediately, with emergency personnel working to clear the debris and locate people who may have been trapped inside.

Officials have not yet confirmed the total number of people who were inside the building when it collapsed. Authorities are expected to provide further details as the rescue operation progresses. 

One person rescued

A latest report from the site said one person had been rescued from beneath the rubble, while teams continued searching for others who may remain trapped.

Visuals from the area showed a large gathering around the collapsed structure as rescue personnel and local residents attempted to assist the emergency response.

Building located near Shiv Mandir

The collapsed structure was located near Shiv Mandir in Satya Niketan, an area in the Moti Bagh region of South-West Delhi.

Satya Niketan is known for its student population and is located close to several educational institutions. However, authorities had not, in the latest updates, confirmed how many students or other residents were inside the building at the time of the collapse. 

Cause of collapse not confirmed

The cause of the building collapse has not yet been established. Authorities are currently focused on rescue operations, and any assessment of the structural condition of the building or possible violations will depend on further investigation.

Claims circulating about the building's use as a paying guest accommodation and the number of people allegedly staying there should be treated cautiously until confirmed by officials.

Authorities assess situation

Police and fire officials remain at the scene as the search operation continues. The number of casualties, if any, and the final count of people trapped under the debris were not immediately available in the latest official-linked reports. 

The incident comes as Delhi authorities continue to face recurring challenges involving ageing, unsafe and structurally compromised buildings. However, it is too early to establish whether any structural-safety violation contributed to Sunday's collapse.

Further updates are expected as rescue teams clear more debris and officials establish the circumstances surrounding the incident.

Members of Hindu organisations gathered outside the Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi on Saturday to protest the detention of social media influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj, who is accused of assaulting the father of student activist Nishu Azad during a protest at Jantar Mantar.

The demonstration came a day after the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) held a protest at the same police station demanding action against Bhardwaj. Delhi Police subsequently detained him in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh, in connection with the case. 

Hindu Groups Demand Action Against Police Case

The protesters gathered in support of Bhardwaj and questioned the sections invoked against him. Organisers demanded that the provisions under the SC/ST Act, POCSO Act and attempt-to-murder provisions be reviewed, claiming that the charges were added under pressure.

The demands are part of a widening dispute between supporters of Bhardwaj and CJP activists over the June 23 incident at Jantar Mantar.

The protest was organised by members of Hindu groups, with the demonstrators seeking what they described as a fair investigation and opposing what they consider excessive legal action against Bhardwaj. 

Bhardwaj Detained in Bulandshahr

Bhardwaj was detained in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh, on Friday following a police search. Reports said he had travelled to the area after the controversy over the Jantar Mantar incident intensified.

Delhi Police had earlier faced pressure from CJP activists, who staged a demonstration outside the Parliament Street station and sought his arrest. Police had assured the protesters that action would be taken, according to reports. 

The detention followed the circulation of a video in which Bhardwaj allegedly spoke about the confrontation with Sanjay Kumar, Nishu Azad's father.

What Happened at Jantar Mantar?

The dispute relates to an incident during a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar on June 23. Sanjay Kumar, who was accompanying his daughter, suffered a head injury during the confrontation.

CJP members alleged that Kumar was attacked and demanded stronger criminal action against those responsible. A case was subsequently registered at Parliament Street Police Station.

Bhardwaj has given a different account. While a video circulating online was interpreted as him claiming responsibility for the assault, he later described the incident as self-defence, saying he had been surrounded by a group of people. 

Delhi Police Disputes Skull Fracture Claim

Delhi Police has disputed claims that Kumar suffered a skull fracture or a severe injury caused by a weapon.

According to the police version reported by The Indian Express, Kumar sustained a head injury after being struck by a metal bracelet, or kada. He was taken to RML Hospital for medical examination, and police said the medico-legal assessment described the injury as minor. The police have also denied allegations of political interference in the investigation. 

The differing accounts over the extent of Kumar's injuries have become a central point of contention in the case.

CJP Had Earlier Protested for Arrest

Before Bhardwaj was detained, CJP representatives marched to Parliament Street Police Station on Friday demanding his arrest.

The protest followed the emergence of the video in which Bhardwaj allegedly discussed the confrontation. CJP representatives called for stringent legal action and criticised the initial handling of the case.

The organisation's protest also drew political attention, with MPs joining the demonstration and demanding action. 

Fresh Charges Add to Dispute

The case has since expanded beyond the original allegations of assault. Reports said police added provisions under the SC/ST Act, while a separate POCSO-related case was also reported in connection with allegations involving a minor. 

The competing protests now reflect two sharply different positions: CJP and its supporters are demanding strict action against Bhardwaj, while Hindu organisations supporting him are questioning the charges and seeking what they describe as a fair investigation.

The investigation and judicial process will determine the allegations against the accused. At this stage, claims made by either side should not be treated as established findings.

Members of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) marched to the Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi on Friday, demanding further action in connection with the alleged assault on Sanjay Kumar, the father of CJP activist Nishu Azad, during a protest at Jantar Mantar.

CJP spokesperson Saurav Das and co-convenor Ashutosh Ranka were among those who reached the police station with supporters. The protest followed the circulation of a podcast video in which Swatantra Bhardwaj, one of the people named in the case, appeared to describe his involvement in the June confrontation. Bhardwaj has subsequently maintained that he acted in self-defence. 

CJP Questions Police Action

CJP leaders have questioned why stronger sections were not added to the case and why Bhardwaj was not arrested after the video surfaced.

Das alleged that the police were reluctant to take further action despite what he described as an admission in the viral video. The organisation has demanded a fresh examination of the case and action against those it alleges were responsible for the assault.

The allegations made by CJP have not been accepted by Delhi Police, which has maintained that the investigation was conducted according to law.

What Happened at Jantar Mantar?

The dispute relates to a confrontation during a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar on June 23. Sanjay Kumar, a resident of Ghaziabad and father of activist Nishu Azad, sustained an injury to his head during the incident.

According to Delhi Police, Kumar was injured by a metal bracelet, or kada, worn by one of the people involved in the scuffle. He was taken to RML Hospital for medical examination.

Police have specifically rejected claims circulating on social media that Kumar suffered a fractured or “cracked” skull, saying the medical-legal report described the injury as simple in nature. 

Viral Podcast Triggers Fresh Row

The issue returned to the spotlight after a podcast featuring Swatantra Bhardwaj circulated widely on social media.

In the video, Bhardwaj appeared to claim that he had struck Sanjay Kumar and discussed the severity of the injury and the fact that he did not spend time in jail. His comments triggered criticism from CJP members and opposition leaders.

However, Bhardwaj later gave a different account, saying the incident was an act of self-defence. He claimed that he had been surrounded by 10 to 15 people and that he acted because he feared he could be seriously harmed. These claims remain part of the competing versions surrounding the incident. 

Delhi Police Says Legal Action Taken

Delhi Police has said that the case was registered at Parliament Street Police Station on the basis of Sanjay Kumar's complaint.

Police said Swatantra Bhardwaj, 21, and another person, Suraj Kumar, 24, were detained at the protest site and subsequently questioned. Notices were served during the investigation, and police said legal action had been taken according to the applicable procedure.

The police have also rejected allegations of political interference in the handling of the case and said a chargesheet would be filed before the competent court. 

Rahul Gandhi Backs Nishu Azad

The controversy has also drawn political attention after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi expressed support for Nishu Azad on social media.

Gandhi said he stood with Nishu and alleged that she was being targeted for raising issues concerning her community and students. His intervention added a political dimension to the dispute over the police investigation.

CJP members have also linked the latest protest to their broader campaign over the treatment of students during demonstrations in Delhi. 

CJP Seeks Stronger Investigation

The organisation has called for stricter action against those it alleges were responsible for the assault and has questioned the police's decision not to invoke more serious provisions at this stage.

For the police, however, the case remains an investigation in which the medical evidence and statements of those involved will determine the applicable legal provisions.

The latest march has therefore brought the June Jantar Mantar incident back into public focus, with CJP demanding stronger police action while Delhi Police maintains that the case has been handled according to established procedure. The competing claims are likely to remain central until further investigation or court proceedings establish the facts.

Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Saturday criticised the Delhi Police over the delay in registering an FIR in connection with the alleged pellet-gun injuries suffered by 19-year-old student Sahil Lochav during a protest in New Delhi. Chidambaram said it took 30 days and a seven-hour sit-in protest by Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi before the complaint was formally registered. The FIR was filed on Friday after Gandhi staged a dharna at the Parliament Street police station, demanding action on Lochav's complaint. 

Chidambaram said the delay was contrary to the Supreme Court's position that an FIR should be registered promptly when a complaint discloses a cognisable offence. In a post on X, he congratulated Lochav for pursuing the matter and Rahul Gandhi for using the protest to press for registration of the case. The Congress leader's remarks were directed at the police response and did not represent an independent judicial finding that the allegations in the complaint had been established. 

What Happened at Protest

The case relates to a July 20 protest at Jantar Mantar in Delhi, during which Lochav sustained injuries that he has attributed to pellet-gun firing. He was subsequently treated at AIIMS and has continued to face problems with his vision, according to reports. The alleged use of pellet guns during the protest has become a political issue, with the Congress demanding accountability and action against those responsible. Reports have also noted that the government has not independently confirmed the use of pellet guns in the incident. 

Rahul Gandhi's intervention brought the issue back into focus on Friday when he, along with other Congress leaders and Lochav, held a prolonged protest outside the Parliament Street police station. Gandhi demanded that police register the complaint and investigate the circumstances surrounding the injuries. The sit-in ended after the Delhi Police registered the FIR. The case was registered under Sections 118 and 125 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, according to reports. 

FIR Registration and Next Step

The registration of an FIR marks the beginning of a formal criminal investigation; it does not by itself establish the allegations made in the complaint. Police will now be expected to investigate the circumstances of the July 20 incident, examine the evidence and determine the sequence of events and responsibility, if any. The development has nevertheless become a point of political confrontation between the Congress and the Delhi Police over the handling of complaints arising from protests.

Chidambaram's criticism centres on the time taken to register the case and the circumstances in which it was eventually filed. For the Congress, the episode has also been presented as an issue of police accountability and the right of an injured protester to have his complaint formally investigated. The police investigation will determine what happened during the protest and whether the allegations made in the complaint are supported by evidence. 

Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi reached Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi on Friday and staged a sit-in while seeking an update on allegations of pellet-gun use during a July 20 protest march towards Parliament.

Rahul Gandhi was accompanied by a student who was allegedly injured during the police action. He is also expected to submit a complaint seeking registration of an FIR and investigation into the incident.

The development comes amid a wider dispute between the Opposition and the government over the police response to the protest, with the Delhi Police maintaining that force was used only after demonstrators allegedly broke barricades and attacked police personnel.

Rahul Seeks Police Action

Rahul Gandhi had previously raised the alleged use of pellet guns during Parliament's Monsoon Session and sought an explanation from Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

On Friday, he went directly to Parliament Street Police Station along with an alleged victim of the incident. His visit is aimed at pressing the police to formally investigate the allegations and establish how the student sustained injuries.

The Congress leader has maintained that students participating in the protest were subjected to excessive police action.

July 20 March Led to Clashes

The controversy relates to the July 20 Parliament march organised by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), which had been protesting over the NEET paper leak and alleged irregularities in examinations.

The agitation began at Jantar Mantar on June 20. Activist Sonam Wangchuk also participated in the protest through a hunger strike.

Clashes broke out between protesters and police when demonstrators attempted to march towards Parliament on July 20. The agitation eventually ended on July 25 following the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.

Rahul Raised Issue in Parliament

Rahul Gandhi raised the allegations in Parliament on July 29, claiming that the Home Minister had authorised the use of bullets and pellet guns against students protesting in Delhi.

The allegation was rejected by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, who described it as serious and baseless and demanded an apology from Rahul Gandhi.

During his remarks, Rahul also referred to conversations with students who had participated in the protest, including an 18-year-old student identified as Lovely. Some of his remarks triggered objections from the ruling side and were subsequently expunged from the proceedings.

Supreme Court Orders Probe

The dispute is also being examined at the judicial level. The Supreme Court has constituted a five-member high-powered committee to investigate allegations concerning police action during the July 20 Parliament march.

The committee is headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice R. Subhash Reddy. Its members include former Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, former Delhi High Court judge Justice Shalinder Kaur, former CBI Director Rishi Kumar Shukla and retired Meghalaya DGP Dr L.R. Bishnoi.

The panel is expected to examine the circumstances surrounding the police action and allegations of excessive force.

Delhi Police Rejects Allegations

The Delhi Police has denied allegations of excessive force and maintained that the July 20 march was not authorised.

During a Supreme Court hearing on August 18, the police told the court that permission had not been granted for the march towards Parliament. It also alleged that several history-sheeters were among those who joined the protest.

According to the police, protesters broke through barricades and assaulted police personnel, following which the situation ceased to remain peaceful.

The police said force was used to bring the situation under control but denied that excessive force had been used against protesters.

Probe Could Establish Facts

Rahul Gandhi's visit to the police station comes as the Supreme Court-appointed panel begins examining the competing claims.

The central issue remains whether pellet guns or other forms of excessive force were used against protesters and, if so, under what circumstances.

The investigation and the Supreme Court-monitored inquiry are expected to establish the sequence of events during the July 20 confrontation and determine the circumstances in which protesters, including the student accompanying Rahul Gandhi, sustained injuries.

Delhi Police have detained seven Bangladeshi nationals for allegedly overstaying in India beyond the period permitted under their visas. The action was carried out under Operation Vista, a visa verification drive conducted by the Anti-Auto Theft Squad (AATS) of the Central District.

Police said the seven individuals were identified during checks at hotels and guest houses in Central and South Delhi. According to officials, all seven had entered India on double-entry visas that permitted a maximum stay of 15 days per visit.

First Detention in Nabi Karim

The investigation began after police received information that some Bangladeshi nationals were allegedly staying in Delhi beyond their authorised period.

Police first detained 26-year-old MD Nazrul Islam Foisal from the Nabi Karim area.

According to officials, his passport was issued on February 8, 2026, while immigration records showed that his authorised stay in India was valid until August 7, 2026.

During questioning, police said Foisal provided information about other Bangladeshi nationals who were allegedly staying in Delhi beyond the permitted period.

Six More Held

Acting on the information, police conducted searches at locations in Sarita Vihar and detained six additional Bangladeshi nationals.

Officials said their passports, visas and immigration records were subsequently examined to establish their legal status in India.

Police said the verification found that all seven had entered the country on double-entry visas carrying a maximum permitted stay of 15 days for each visit.

No Criminal Record Found

Delhi Police said no previous criminal involvement was found against any of the seven individuals during the verification process.

The police action was focused on alleged violations of visa conditions rather than any separate criminal case, officials said.

The operation was conducted by the AATS of Central District under the supervision of Inspector Sandeep Dabas.

FRRO Starts Deportation Proceedings

Following the verification, the seven nationals were produced before the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO).

The FRRO issued restriction orders against them and initiated proceedings for their deportation from India.

The individuals were subsequently shifted to the Detention Centre at Sewa Dham, Shahzada Bagh, Sarai Rohilla, where they will remain pending completion of the deportation process.

Police said the action was taken under the applicable legal provisions governing visa violations and the stay of foreign nationals in India.

Seven Nationals Identified

The seven Bangladeshi nationals detained during the operation were identified as:

• MD Nazrul Islam Foisal, 26

• Mohammad Amjad Hossen, 26

• Moinul Hossain, 24

• Alamin, 25

• MD Kawasae Ali, 25

• Amran Hossain, 29

• Afranul Haque Bhuyan Sami, 23

Visa Verification Drive Continues

Operation Vista is part of Delhi Police's efforts to verify the immigration status of foreign nationals staying in the capital.

The latest action highlights the scrutiny being applied to visa validity and authorised periods of stay, particularly during checks at hotels, guest houses and other accommodation facilities.

The seven individuals will remain at the detention facility until the relevant authorities complete the required formalities for their deportation.

NHRC Orders Criminal Action

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has directed the Directors General of Police (DGPs) of six states and Union Territories to register First Information Reports (FIRs) against Meta Platforms over alleged violations of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 linked to child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on Instagram and Facebook.

According to reports, the Commission issued the directions after taking cognisance of allegations that pornographic and age-inappropriate content, potentially containing child sexual abuse material, was accessible through Meta-owned platforms.

The order applies to police authorities in Bihar, Chandigarh, Haryana, Odisha, West Bengal and Delhi.

Complaint Triggered Investigation

The Commission acted on a complaint submitted by a non-profit organisation, which reportedly received anonymous information regarding several Instagram and Facebook links allegedly containing or facilitating access to CSAM.

The organisation clarified that it had neither viewed nor downloaded the suspected content and had only shared the URLs with authorities for investigation, stating that it acted in compliance with the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Act.

In its notice dated August 3, the NHRC directed the concerned authorities to investigate the allegations and initiate legal action wherever cognisable offences are established.

Police Asked to Register FIRs

The NHRC has instructed state police cyber crime units and Special Juvenile Police Units to examine the reported URLs and register FIRs wherever offences under the POCSO Act or other applicable laws are found.

Police have also been directed to identify those responsible for uploading or circulating the content, rescue any identified child victims, produce them before the Child Welfare Committee, and coordinate with agencies including the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and Meta.

The Commission has sought detailed Action Taken Reports (ATRs) from all concerned authorities within one week.

Directions Issued to Meta and MeitY

The NHRC has also issued specific directions to Meta and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.

Meta has been asked to immediately remove the reported content, preserve metadata, IP logs and other digital evidence, comply with mandatory reporting obligations under the POCSO Act, and provide details of the preventive mechanisms adopted to detect and prevent child sexual abuse material on its platforms.

MeitY has been directed to submit a report on the blocking of the identified URLs, action taken against the intermediary and measures being implemented to strengthen online child safety.

Inquiry Linked to Earlier BBC Investigation

The latest directions follow an earlier NHRC proceeding initiated after a BBC World Service investigation alleged that paid advertisements on Instagram promoted or facilitated access to child sexual abuse material through coded search terms before redirecting users to Telegram channels.

Following those reports, the NHRC had instructed Delhi Police to conduct a detailed investigation, preserve electronic evidence and examine whether Meta fulfilled its legal obligations to report suspected offences under Sections 19 and 20 of the POCSO Act.

The Commission later issued a reminder after Delhi Police failed to submit its Action Taken Report within the prescribed deadline.

Separate NCPCR Probe Underway

Meanwhile, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has also initiated a separate inquiry into allegations that Meta's platforms were used to facilitate access to child sexual exploitation material.

The Commission sought an explanation from Meta after taking suo motu cognisance of the BBC investigation. Government sources said the company's response has been received and is under examination.

The NHRC has reiterated that every instance involving the creation, circulation or continued availability of child sexual abuse material constitutes a continuing violation of children's dignity, privacy and fundamental human rights, requiring urgent investigation, victim rehabilitation and prosecution of those responsible.

Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke on Thursday demanded the resignation of Union Home Minister Amit Shah over the police action against protesters during the July 20 Parliament march, alleging that the crackdown could not have taken place without instructions from the home minister. Speaking to journalists in Maharashtra’s Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, Dipke said he agreed with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, who had made similar allegations a day earlier and sought Shah’s resignation. Dipke alleged that students protesting against examination irregularities were attacked and injured during the march and claimed responsibility for the action ultimately rested with the home ministry. His remarks come amid an intensifying political row over the handling of the July 20 demonstration and allegations of excessive force by security personnel. The allegations against Shah remain claims made by Dipke and Gandhi, and the material provided does not establish that the home minister personally ordered the police action.

Dipke also rejected allegations that the CJP received foreign funding, turning the charge back on the government. He argued that if an organisation was actually receiving foreign funds while Shah headed the home ministry, it would represent a failure of the ministry itself. The CJP founder went further, making serious allegations about the violence reported during the July 20 protest. He claimed Delhi Police had orchestrated stone-pelting to create grounds for action against demonstrators. According to Dipke, a truck carrying stones and a damaged vehicle were brought to the Jantar Mantar protest site to create the impression that police action had followed violence by protesters. He alleged that people associated with the BJP threw stones while students were subsequently blamed. These claims have not been established as fact in the information provided. Dipke also alleged that he and his family had previously received threats intended to pressure him into joining the BJP. He claimed his parents were threatened and that the family was told he should join the party or face consequences. The BJP has denied allegations that Dipke or members of his family were threatened.

BJP leader Keshav Upadhye hit back at Dipke, accusing him of turning the student agitation into a political campaign. Upadhye argued that the BJP-led government had responded to protesters’ demands by bringing legislation against paper leaks and accepting the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. He said Dipke should have acknowledged those developments instead of engaging in politics and suggested that he join the Congress if he wanted to follow Rahul Gandhi’s political line. The confrontation comes days after Pradhan resigned following weeks of protests over examination irregularities that repeatedly disrupted central Delhi and gave the Opposition a major issue to target the government. His resignation followed large demonstrations in which students crossed police barricades during protests that became among the most significant street agitations of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s third term. Since the July 20 Parliament march, security forces have faced allegations of using excessive force while dispersing demonstrators. Dipke’s decision to echo Rahul Gandhi’s demand for Amit Shah’s resignation has now pushed the controversy further into the political arena, with the CJP and Opposition questioning accountability for the police action while the BJP rejects the allegations and accuses Dipke of pursuing a political agenda.

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Delhi government to ensure medical treatment for protesters injured during the July 20 Parliament march from Jantar Mantar, while also ordering the Centre to preserve records related to weapons and ammunition used by the Rapid Action Force during the demonstration. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohan was hearing petitions concerning the alleged use of pellet guns against protesters during the Cockroach Janta Party's march. The court, however, declined for now to impose a blanket ban on pellet guns, observing that police may use such weapons in specific situations under the existing framework. The bench said it would be difficult to prohibit their use without a direct challenge to the police rules that permit such weapons. At the same time, the Supreme Court sought the Centre's response on guidelines governing the use of pellet guns and directed that records concerning RAF weapons and ammunition deployed during the Jantar Mantar protest be kept safe.

The petitions were filed by former IPS officer Yashovardhan Azad and alleged victims Prashant Kumar Singh and Sheikh Irshad Mansoori, who sought a ban on pellet guns. They claimed that the RAF used pellet guns against students during the July 20 march. The issue has remained controversial since the protest, with allegations surrounding the type and extent of force used by security personnel. According to the details presented, more than 100 people were injured during the clashes, including protesters and police personnel. The CJP had called for a march from Jantar Mantar towards Parliament, with the demonstration continuing from around 8 am until 5 pm and witnessing repeated confrontations between protesters and security forces. Some demonstrators allegedly broke barricades and moved towards Parliament through Parliament Street, Janpath, the War Memorial area, Kartavya Path and Vijay Chowk. Police and Rapid Action Force personnel resorted to crowd-control measures as the situation deteriorated, including lathi-charge and tear gas. Images of stone-pelting also emerged later in the evening, while protesters alleged that pellet guns had been fired at students. Police cleared Jantar Mantar by around 5 pm, but CJP supporters reportedly returned to the protest site around 11 pm and resumed their demonstration.

The case has also brought wider attention to the rules governing the use of pellet guns in India. Pellet guns are not completely prohibited in the country. According to the framework described in the petition-related material, law-enforcement agencies operate under guidelines and standard operating procedures for the use of such less-lethal weapons in crowd-control situations. The stated approach is that police should first use methods considered less likely to cause serious injury when dealing with a breakdown of law and order. Weapons such as pellet guns are meant to be considered only when other measures fail to bring a violent crowd under control, and their use should remain proportionate to the situation. Security personnel are also expected to take precautions to minimise injuries to civilians and fellow personnel. Thursday's Supreme Court directions do not amount to a finding that the RAF unlawfully used pellet guns during the July 20 protest. The allegations and circumstances surrounding their reported use remain before the court. By directing preservation of weapons and ammunition records and seeking the Centre's response on the guidelines, the bench has ensured that material connected with the security operation remains available while the matter is examined further.

Police says facial recognition identified participants with pending criminal cases; Supreme Court separately examining allegations of police excesses

Delhi Police has claimed that 2,873 people with pending criminal cases participated in the Cockroach Janta Party's (CJP) Parliament March held on July 20, including 101 individuals accused in murder cases. The police said the participants were identified using technological tools, including the Facial Recognition System (FRS), and alleged that 989 of them are involved in serious criminal offences.

The claims come as the Supreme Court is separately hearing petitions alleging excessive police force during the student-led protest, making the events surrounding the July 20 demonstration a subject of both criminal investigation and judicial scrutiny.

Police cites serious criminal background

According to Delhi Police, those identified through its verification process face charges across multiple categories of serious crime. Besides the 101 murder accused, the list includes 62 individuals booked for attempted murder, 284 for robbery and dacoity, 61 for rape, six under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 25 for crimes against women, 229 under the Arms Act, 135 for snatching, 19 for kidnapping, and 67 under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Police officials alleged that many among those identified are repeat offenders with multiple criminal cases pending against them.

Police personnel among those injured

The July 20 Parliament March witnessed clashes between protesters and security personnel in central Delhi after demonstrators attempted to move towards Parliament.

Delhi Police said 118 police personnel, including senior officers ranging from the Special Commissioner to ACP rank, sustained injuries during the violence. Several women police personnel were also among the injured. Around 60 protesters were reportedly injured during the confrontation.

Security forces used lathi-charge and tear gas after the situation escalated, while incidents of stone-pelting were also reported.

Social media posts under scanner

Delhi Police also said it has issued notices to multiple social media platforms seeking the removal of posts and videos allegedly containing objectionable or abusive remarks targeting the Prime Minister that were circulated during the Jantar Mantar protest and the Parliament March.

According to the police, the action is part of its ongoing investigation into content shared during and after the protests.

Matter under judicial review

The police's latest claims come amid ongoing proceedings before the Supreme Court, where petitions have alleged excessive force by law enforcement during the student protests. The apex court has ordered preservation of evidence and is examining allegations relating to the police response, while the Delhi Police continues its investigation into violence during the demonstration.

A preliminary inquiry by the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) has found that a Rapid Action Force (RAF) jawan fired seven pellet gun rounds during the July 20 'Sansad Chalo' march in the national capital, with five pellets striking protesters and two hitting the ground, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

The findings relate to the protest organised over the alleged examination paper leak issue, during which clashes broke out between demonstrators and security personnel near Parliament.

According to the preliminary probe, the RAF personnel was deployed in the Connaught Place area when the incident occurred. Sources said the pellet gun was used after protesters allegedly attacked security personnel and resorted to stone-pelting.

The internal inquiry was initiated after questions were raised over whether RAF personnel had used pellet guns during the crowd-control operation.

Three Injured in Pellet Firing

The investigation has identified at least three people who sustained pellet injuries during the protest.

Those injured include 25-year-old Irshad Sheikh, who works in Gurugram, 19-year-old Delhi University student Sahil Lochab, and a 28-year-old magazine journalist. All three reportedly received medical treatment following the incident.

Sources said examination of operational records maintained by the deployed RAF personnel confirmed that seven pellet rounds were discharged, with five hitting protesters and the remaining two striking the ground.

CRPF Reviewing Use of Force

CRPF Director General Gyanendra Pratap Singh said the operation would undergo a professional review, as is standard practice after major law-and-order deployments.

He said the protest had concluded and the situation had returned to normal, adding that headquarters would present its official findings after completion of the review process.

The preliminary findings have come amid increasing scrutiny of the police response to the July 20 Parliament march.

Internal Review Flags Operational Concerns

Earlier reports indicated that RAF Inspector General (Operations) M.A. Dhundhia informed senior officers that the "force gradient" adopted during the operation did not fully conform to prescribed operational standards and RAF training protocols.

In policing, the term force gradient refers to the principle of using the minimum level of force necessary, with escalation depending on the nature and intensity of the threat.

The observations reportedly emerged during an internal review conducted after the protest.

Fresh Operational Guidelines Issued

On July 22, the RAF conducted a video conference with company commanders and commandants deployed in Delhi to assess the handling of the protest.

According to sources, officials reviewed the deployment strategy, the role played by RAF personnel and the crowd-control measures adopted during the demonstration at Jantar Mantar and the subsequent Parliament march.

Following the review, officers were instructed to exercise restraint and ensure that force is used only when absolutely necessary.

The guidelines also emphasised issuing clear warnings before using force and adopting a graded response, including lathicharge, tear gas and other approved crowd-control methods, depending on the situation.

Wider Legal Scrutiny Continues

The July 20 Parliament march has also become the subject of judicial scrutiny.

The Supreme Court is hearing petitions alleging excessive police force against students protesting examination paper leaks, while the Delhi High Court has directed authorities to preserve CCTV footage and all records relating to the police action.

The protests, which centred on alleged irregularities in national entrance examinations, have intensified political debate over examination reforms and police handling of public demonstrations.

Meta Title: 

Meta Description: 

Focus Keywords: 

Tags: 

Delhi Police is preparing to initiate action against allegedly objectionable and abusive social media content targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other political leaders following the recent student protest at Jantar Mantar, according to police sources.

Officials said notices may soon be issued to major social media platforms seeking the removal of posts, videos, reels and comments that are found to contain abusive or objectionable material linked to the protest.

The move comes after authorities began reviewing online content uploaded during and after the 36-day agitation over the alleged NEET paper leak.

Social Media Content Under Review

According to police sources, Delhi Police is examining content circulating across multiple social media platforms to determine whether it violates legal provisions or has the potential to disturb public order.

After completing the review, the police are expected to send formal notices to the concerned platforms requesting the removal of content considered unlawful or abusive.

Officials said the department's social media monitoring unit has been tracking online activity related to the protest and identifying posts that may warrant further legal action.

Monitoring Exercise Underway

Police sources said the identification process is already in progress, with investigators scrutinising videos, comments and other digital content shared during the agitation.

Authorities are also assessing whether any of the material amounts to offences under existing laws governing online communication, public order and defamation.

No official details have been released regarding the number of posts under review or the platforms that may receive notices.

Protest Marked by Strong Digital Presence

The student movement, which continued for 36 days at Jantar Mantar, drew widespread attention not only for its demands but also for its extensive use of digital platforms.

Supporters used social media, live streams, memes, reels and online campaigns to amplify the protest, while food, medicines and other essential supplies were delivered directly to demonstrators through online delivery applications.

Organisers also maintained digital records of assistance received through dedicated help desks, reflecting the movement's technology-driven approach.

Women and Volunteers Played Key Role

The protest witnessed significant participation by women, with several participants describing the demonstration as a safe environment despite large crowds.

Volunteers distributed drinking water, provided medical assistance and supported fellow protesters during the prolonged sit-in amid the summer heat.

The movement relied heavily on digital communication to maintain nationwide engagement even during periods of internet disruption.

Concerns Emerged During Final Phase

While the protest remained largely peaceful for most of its duration, a few incidents during its closing stages drew criticism.

Police sources and observers noted that some individuals with no apparent connection to the movement joined the gathering, creating disruption during the distribution of food and other supplies.

There were also reports of isolated incidents of violence after the resignation of former Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, which, according to observers, affected the movement's public image.

Protest Ended After Minister's Resignation

The agitation began over allegations surrounding the NEET paper leak and continued from June 20 at Jantar Mantar.

The protest concluded on July 25 after Dharmendra Pradhan resigned as Union Education Minister. Social activist Sonam Wangchuk, who had joined the students' hunger strike, also ended his fast after receiving assurances from the government.

Delhi Police's review of online content is continuing, and further action will depend on the outcome of the ongoing legal and technical examination.