Delhi Police has said its Facial Recognition System (FRS) identified around 400 people with criminal records in and around Delhi’s Jantar Mantar protest site between July 20 and July 24, as part of its investigation into the violence reported during demonstrations over the alleged NEET-UG 2026 paper leak and examination irregularities.
According to police officials, the AI-enabled technology compares faces captured by CCTV cameras with the department’s database of wanted persons, absconders and habitual offenders. Investigators are now verifying whether any of those identified were involved in the clashes that broke out on July 20.
Police have maintained that the system is aimed at identifying criminals rather than monitoring peaceful protesters. However, civil liberties groups, digital rights advocates and some protesters have questioned the use of live facial recognition at a democratic protest, arguing that it raises concerns about privacy, transparency and the potential chilling effect on citizens exercising their right to peaceful assembly.
The development comes as Delhi Police continue to analyse CCTV footage, mobile videos, drone recordings and witness statements while separate legal proceedings concerning the protests and allegations of police excess remain underway.
AI Surveillance Under Scanner
The deployment of Facial Recognition System technology at one of the country’s most prominent protest sites has drawn national attention, both for its role in policing and for the wider questions it raises about surveillance in public spaces. According to Delhi Police, four dedicated FRS units equipped with high-resolution cameras have been installed around Jantar Mantar, particularly at key entry and exit points.
The technology scans faces captured through CCTV cameras and compares them in real time with the police database of wanted criminals, history-sheeters, absconders and individuals categorised as “Bad Characters” (BCs). When a match is detected, officers receive an alert for further verification before any action is taken.
Police officials have said the technology has been used for several years during major public gatherings and should not be viewed as a tool to monitor ordinary citizens. Responding to criticism, officials clarified that the system does not create a database of all attendees but only flags individuals whose facial features match existing police records.
They further stated that intelligence inputs had suggested the possibility of anti-social elements attempting to exploit the large gathering, prompting enhanced surveillance measures. Officials also said that nearly 100 facial recognition-enabled cameras are already operational across the New Delhi district as part of routine security infrastructure.
While some reports citing police sources referred to around 400 identified individuals with criminal records, others mentioned more than 2,500 database matches, although authorities have not publicly explained the variation in these figures or clarified whether they refer to different stages of verification.
Protest, Investigation And Debate
The surveillance operation follows the student-led protests over the alleged NEET-UG 2026 paper leak, which drew thousands of students, activists and opposition leaders to Jantar Mantar demanding accountability, judicial intervention and the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan.
Although much of the protest remained peaceful, clashes were reported on July 20, with incidents of vandalism, injuries and confrontations between protesters and police leading to an expanded investigation.
Delhi Police are now examining multiple forms of evidence, including CCTV recordings, drone footage, mobile phone videos, social media content and eyewitness accounts, alongside alerts generated through the Facial Recognition System. Officials have described the AI platform as an investigative aid rather than standalone evidence, emphasising that every match is manually verified before it forms part of the inquiry.
The deployment has also reignited a wider national conversation about the balance between public safety and individual freedoms. Digital rights organisations and privacy advocates have questioned whether people attending peaceful protests are adequately informed about biometric surveillance, how long such data may be stored and whether independent oversight exists to prevent misuse.
They argue that awareness of facial recognition technology could discourage citizens from participating in lawful demonstrations, thereby affecting democratic participation. Images from the protest showed several participants wearing scarves or masks, with some observers suggesting that concerns about surveillance may have influenced these choices. At the same time, supporters of the technology argue that it enables police to quickly identify wanted offenders in large crowds and can help prevent violence or identify those responsible for criminal acts.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The deployment of advanced technology in policing reflects the growing role of artificial intelligence in public safety, but it also demands equally strong safeguards to protect civil liberties. Technologies such as facial recognition may assist investigations and help identify individuals accused of serious offences, yet their use must remain transparent, proportionate and subject to meaningful oversight. Public trust is strengthened not merely through effective policing but through accountability, clarity about how personal data is collected and used, and respect for the constitutional right to peaceful protest.
