Delhi Police Denies Excessive Force During Protest, Says 5,000 Cops Managed 30,000+ Protesters

August 18, 2026

New Delhi: Delhi Police defended the use of force during the “Parliament Chalo” protest on July 20, telling the Supreme Court that they acted “gradually” only after the situation deteriorated. According to the police, approximately 5,000 policemen were engaged in handling over 30,000 protesters.

According to the police’s counter-affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, protesters were attempting to break through multiple layers of barricades and advance towards Parliament. During this, over 240 policemen and uniformed personnel and approximately 200 protesters/others were injured.

Situation worsened after the barricades were broken

The police stated that initially, efforts were made to control the crowd and keep the protest peaceful. However, the situation deteriorated after protesters broke through the barricades and advanced towards Parliament.

The police, calling the protest an illegal gathering, said that allegations of use of force based on photographs, videos, and social media reports are one-sided and do not fully reflect the events.

‘Police did not carry sticks with sharp nails’

The police denied the allegations of using sticks with sharp nails on the protesters. The affidavit stated that such an object was seen only once in the available video, and that it was in the hands of a protester, not a policeman.

The police also alleged that some protesters attacked police officers, pulled off their protective equipment, and pushed them onto the cobblestone road. According to the police, criminal cases were registered against 2,873 people present at the protest site.

Defending plainclothes policemen and face recognition

Delhi Police also defended the deployment of plainclothes policemen with sticks. According to the police, these personnel were from the Special Branch, Special Cell, Crime Branch, and local police and were deployed for crowd control.

Police described the use of facial recognition technology as a “reasonable policing measure.” They said it was used to identify people already booked on serious criminal charges, not to indiscriminately monitor peaceful protesters.