Delhi protest: Right-wing groups assault protesters, journalists amid heavy security deployment

The reported violence involved threats, beatings, dragging, kicking, slapping, verbal abuse, and an alleged attack with brass knuckles. Protesters and journalists were targeted during a heavily guarded demonstration in central Delhi. The incidents mattered because several assaults were reportedly visible to police personnel.

Near Palika Bazaar at 2.30pm, more than 30 men identifying themselves as Bajrang Dal members shouted slogans and threatened journalists. Near the MCD Civic Centre, men identified as belonging to the Hindustan Raksha Dal allegedly dragged and assaulted women and men. One unverified video showed a young woman being beaten until her sister pulled her away.

The report also described attacks in Connaught Place, including an alleged assault on a protester whose T-shirt was torn. Police said they rescued and helped the woman and removed men from the scene. However, no FIR had been filed against those men when the report was published.

In political terms, “right-wing organisation” is a broad label for groups commonly associated with social conservatism, nationalism, traditional authority, or a stronger emphasis on order and established institutions. The label does not by itself prove that a group committed violence. Conduct must be assessed from specific evidence.

The report identified two groups during the confrontations. More than 30 men near Palika Bazaar said they were from the Bajrang Dal and threatened journalists. Near the MCD Civic Centre, men described as belonging to the Hindustan Raksha Dal allegedly dragged, assaulted, and threatened people on the street.

The report presents these identifications in the context of alleged attacks, videos, and witness accounts. It also says the Bajrang Dal did not respond to HT’s request for comment. The Hindustan Raksha Dal’s response is not reported. The label therefore supplies political context, while the allegations require investigation and due process.

The security operation was large: more than 25,000 personnel were deployed across central Delhi. That scale shows the authorities treated the protest as a major public-order event. Yet the report describes relatively small groups of men confronting protesters and journalists within that security presence.

Near Palika Bazaar, more than 30 men who said they were from the Bajrang Dal threatened journalists. Police chased them away and detained some about half an hour later. At the MCD Civic Centre, men identified as Hindustan Raksha Dal members became involved in a violent confrontation. The report does not state their number.

The comparison is therefore clear but incomplete. The security deployment exceeded the specifically counted Palika Bazaar group by hundreds of times, but no total exists for all alleged attackers. The account raises questions about how groups entered protest areas and why some assaults reportedly occurred in front of police personnel.

During a public demonstration, police are responsible for protecting protesters, journalists, bystanders, and other people from violence. They should prevent foreseeable attacks, intervene when assaults occur, provide immediate assistance, preserve evidence, and apply the law without favouring a political side. Their powers must also remain lawful and proportionate.

The report gives mixed examples. Police chased away the group near Palika Bazaar and detained some men about half an hour later. Senior officers said they rescued and helped a woman near the MCD Civic Centre and removed the men from the spot. Yet witnesses and the report also described assaults occurring in front of police personnel.

Those duties continue even when security deployment is extensive or tensions are politically charged. Authorities should record complaints, identify suspects, secure video and witness evidence, and explain decisions not to proceed. The report notes that police spokespersons did not respond to HT’s requests, leaving important accountability questions unanswered.

An FIR is the formal record that begins the police process for a cognisable alleged offence in India. If police witness or receive information about a serious assault but no FIR is recorded, the allegation may not enter a structured investigation. That can delay evidence collection, suspect identification, medical documentation, and protection for witnesses.

The report says senior officers stated that police rescued and helped a woman after men allegedly dragged and beat her near the MCD Civic Centre. It also says no FIR had been filed against those men at the time of reporting. A widely shared video showed the incident, but HT had not verified it.

The absence of an FIR does not prove that no offence occurred, nor does it end every possible legal route. People may still submit complaints or pursue other remedies. But delay can make accountability harder, especially when evidence includes videos, witnesses, and injuries. Police decisions should be documented and open to lawful review.

India generally protects peaceful expression, assembly, movement, and the press through constitutional rights. Protesters may participate peacefully, and journalists may report and document public events. These protections matter because public demonstrations and independent reporting help people question official conduct and public policy.

The rights are not unlimited. Authorities may impose lawful and reasonable restrictions for public order, security, or other recognised grounds. Protesters cannot lawfully assault others or damage property. Journalists may document events, but ordinary laws still apply to them. Police should not use restrictions as a pretext for arbitrary violence, intimidation, or viewpoint-based targeting.

Applied to this report, protesters and journalists should generally be able to observe and record events without being threatened. The 21-year-old media student said men threatened him and his friends while they made videos. Any police response should distinguish peaceful documentation from unlawful conduct and should investigate alleged attacks regardless of political affiliation.

The rule of law means laws, rather than personal power, political identity, or official discretion, govern public life. It includes equal treatment, lawful procedures, independent accountability, and protection from arbitrary force. These principles are especially important during protests, when competing political claims and public-order pressures are intense.

In this report, the issue is not only that assaults were alleged. It is also that some men were reportedly seen beating protesters in front of police personnel, while a woman said police saw her attack. Police reportedly removed the men and rescued her, but no FIR had been filed against them when the report appeared.

Impartial enforcement would require authorities to protect protesters and journalists, investigate alleged attackers, and assess evidence by conduct rather than affiliation. It would also require lawful action against anyone who commits offences, regardless of whether they are protesters, security personnel, or members of a right-wing group. That approach supports trust and future peaceful demonstrations.