The families of four police personnel, including Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Kailash Singh Bisht, have approached the Supreme Court seeking accountability against those allegedly responsible for instigating and carrying out violence during the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) protest march in Delhi on July 20.
The intervention application comes while the apex court is already hearing separate petitions alleging excessive force by the Delhi Police and the Rapid Action Force (RAF) against protesters. The applicants have alleged that police and central force personnel were attacked with stones, glass bottles, broken bricks and sharpened tiles during clashes near Jantar Mantar, Tolstoy Marg and adjoining areas as protesters attempted to march towards Parliament.
Besides seeking action against those allegedly involved in the violence, the families have urged the court to direct the Union Government to frame national guidelines to better protect men and women in uniform while on duty.
Meanwhile, protesters and civil society groups continue to allege that security forces used disproportionate force, while Delhi Police maintain that officers acted to enforce prohibitory orders and prevent protesters from breaching security barricades. The Supreme Court is expected to consider the intervention alongside the pending petitions, potentially examining both allegations of police excesses and attacks on law enforcement personnel.
Families Seek Accountability
In their application before the Supreme Court, the families contend that the violence against police personnel was not spontaneous but allegedly orchestrated, resulting in serious injuries to officers deployed to maintain law and order.
The plea specifically names ACP Kailash Singh Bisht, who was among several officers reportedly injured during the clashes. According to the application, police personnel and members of central armed police forces came under attack from projectiles including stones, glass bottles, broken bricks and sharpened roofing or floor tiles.
The applicants have requested that those allegedly responsible for planning or carrying out the attacks be identified and prosecuted in accordance with the law. Beyond criminal accountability, they have also sought broader institutional reforms, including standard operating procedures to safeguard frontline personnel during violent protests, stronger legal mechanisms to deter assaults on officers, and enhanced accountability for attacks on security forces.
Delhi Police have consistently maintained that protesters attempted to violate prohibitory orders issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), breached barricades and resorted to violence while attempting to reach Parliament. The police have argued before various courts that several officers sustained injuries while carrying out their statutory duties during the unrest.
Parallel Petitions Continue
The intervention by the police families comes amid an ongoing legal examination of the events surrounding the July 20 protest. Separate petitions filed before the Supreme Court have accused Delhi Police and RAF personnel of using excessive force against demonstrators, including allegations of baton charges, tear gas and disproportionate crowd-control measures.
Petitioners have sought the registration of FIRs against police officials, an independent investigation into the alleged use of force, compensation for injured protesters and judicial oversight of future policing during public demonstrations.
During a recent hearing, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant observed that peaceful protest is a constitutionally protected right and remarked that mere agitation cannot justify police excesses. At the same time, the Court stressed the need for an impartial examination of allegations and balanced nationwide protocols that protect both democratic freedoms and public order.
Parallel proceedings are also underway before the Delhi High Court, which has directed authorities to preserve CCTV footage, police videography and other electronic evidence relating to the clashes. The High Court has indicated that even where an assembly may be unlawful, law enforcement agencies are expected to follow established legal procedures while dispersing crowds.
The conflicting accounts of the incident continue to shape the legal proceedings, with police alleging organised violence by sections of the protesters, while demonstrators and civil society organisations insist that many participants were peaceful and were subjected to unnecessary force. Courts have repeatedly emphasised that conclusions should be drawn from verified evidence rather than unverified videos circulating on social media.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The developments before the Supreme Court underscore the complex balance between protecting the constitutional right to peaceful protest and ensuring the safety of police personnel tasked with maintaining public order. Violence against any individual whether a protester, police officer or bystander undermines democratic values and weakens public trust in institutions.
Equally, allegations of excessive force by law enforcement deserve an independent and transparent examination to ensure accountability on all sides. As the courts consider competing claims, the emphasis should remain on evidence, due process and institutional reforms that reduce the likelihood of such confrontations in the future.
Also read: CJP Claims Centre Assured No FIRs Against NEET Protesters Across NDA States After Late-Night Talks
