Days after Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas wrote to the Chief Justice of India alleging Delhi Police assault on parliamentarians and demonstrators, another lawmaker has now formally approached the Supreme Court over police conduct during street demonstrations in the capital.
Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament and Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) National President AA Rahim has filed a fresh petition before the top court. The plea brings disturbing claims to light, alleging that youth activists were illegally bundled into specialised police vehicles, segregated, and physically brutalised inside moving mobile cells away from public scrutiny.
What Happened During The Connaught Place Protest?
The incident traces back to Sunday afternoon when DYFI office bearers, central committee members, and youth activists gathered in central Delhi to hold a demonstration. The protestors were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
According to the petition, Delhi Police personnel swiftly intervened at Connaught Place and detained the participants. Instead of following the standard procedures laid down for formal arrest and custody, the police allegedly forced the protestors into an ordinary bus. From there, the chain of events took an alarming turn, according to the court filings.
The plea states that the initial bus was not taken straight to a local police station. Instead, it was driven to a heavily guarded enclosure near Daryaganj Restaurant. There, the police allegedly separated the detainees by gender and forced them into a specialised police van that had been divided internally into five isolated, curtained cells.
Allegations Of Violence Inside Compartmentalised Vans
The petition describes the treatment inside these compartmentalised vans as deliberate, calculated violence rather than accidental police heavy-handedness. Once locked inside the individual compartments, activists were allegedly subjected to physical assaults while the vehicle moved across the city.
According to the plea, police officers kicked detainees in the spine with heavy boots, punched them in the face, and struck them on the head. Several officers carrying out the detention allegedly wore plain clothes or uniform jackets without visible name badges, making immediate identification impossible.
The activists were eventually taken to Surajmal Stadium around 2:00 PM. In total, the petition states that the protestors were kept under lock and key for more than seven hours without food, water, or access to basic facilities, before being released later that evening.
The Issue Of Mobile Detention And Missing Records
One of the central legal issues raised before the Supreme Court is the concept of unrecorded, mobile detention. The petition argues that using partitioned, curtained police vehicles turns state transport into temporary interrogation chambers that exist entirely outside the framework of the law.
When citizens are taken into custody, the law demands strict accountability. However, the petition alleges that:
- No arrest memo was prepared at the spot or handed over to those detained.
- No official grounds of arrest were communicated to the DYFI members.
- No immediate entry was made in standard police station registers during the transit period.
- Detainees were kept in moving custody without any clear paper trail for hours.
The plea also flags events that took place after the release. When injured activists visited Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital for mandatory medico-legal examination, plainclothes police officers were allegedly present inside the hospital premises. The petition expresses serious apprehension that the resulting medical certificates might not accurately capture the true extent of the injuries sustained in custody.
What The Law Says: Arrest Safeguards And Fundamental Rights
Indian criminal procedure and the Constitution provide strict protections to prevent police brutality and secret detentions. When an agency takes a person into custody, specific legal rules come into play immediately.
Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which replaced the old Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, police officers are legally mandated to follow strict arrest protocols. Officers must wear visible, accurate identification badges bearing their names and designations. Furthermore, every arrest requires an official arrest memo countersigned by a witness and communicated clearly to the detainee’s family or friends.
The Constitution of India also acts as a shield against custodial violence:
- Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that this fundamental right includes freedom from torture, cruel treatment, and degrading custody.
- Article 22: Requires that every detained citizen must be informed of the grounds of arrest as soon as possible and produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of detention.
Keeping individuals inside curtained, mobile compartments without documenting their custody directly undermines these statutory and constitutional checks.
What The MP Has Asked The Supreme Court To Do
In his petition, AA Rahim has asked the Supreme Court to step in and establish binding safeguards against such practices. Specifically, the plea seeks:
- A formal judicial declaration prohibiting the use of curtained, compartmentalised vehicles as unrecorded holding cells.
- Full disclosure and preservation of all official records, logbooks, CCTV footage, and vehicle GPS data relating to the Sunday detentions.
- A prompt, independent inquiry to establish the full truth of what transpired inside the vans.
- Official identification of all personnel from the Delhi Police, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), or other security wings who took part in the detentions.
- Adequate compensation for the activists who endured physical injuries and unlawful confinement.
The plea also highlights that these actions violated directions issued by the Supreme Court just hours earlier during an urgent Sunday hearing concerning the ongoing protest clampdowns in the national capital.
Why This Matters For Everyday Citizens
This case goes far beyond a confrontation between student activists and law enforcement. It strikes at the heart of public accountability and personal liberty for every citizen who steps out to exercise the democratic right to peaceful protest.
If enforcement agencies can turn moving vehicles into opaque detention rooms where rights do not apply and identities are concealed, ordinary legal protections lose their meaning. The outcome of this petition will determine whether police transit vehicles remain bound by open constitutional rules or become blind spots in India’s criminal justice system.
When citizens are detained, the rule of law must travel inside the police vehicle with them, ensuring that state power remains strictly accountable at every step.
Story reported by Barandbench. This article is BareLaw’s independent explanation and analysis.
📲 Get every BareLaw story on Telegram — simple legal news, 5 times a day, free: t.me/barelaw
