CRPF officer files complaint over alleged mistreatment of women protesters by Delhi police, CAPF

Assistant commandant Rahul Solanki complained that Delhi Police and Central Armed Police Force personnel may have physically mistreated women protesters. He filed the complaint with the National Human Rights Commission, Delhi Police and the National Commission for Women. He said he was acting as a concerned citizen, not officially for the CRPF.

Solanki attached three social-media video links. He said they prima facie showed women being physically mistreated by police and CAPF personnel. However, he expressly stated that he had not independently verified the footage. His request was for an impartial investigation, including forensic checks and review of the complete incidents.

The complaint does not establish guilt. It asks authorities to determine whether misconduct occurred and who was responsible. Solanki also requested gender-sensitivity training for personnel handling women protesters. The CRPF had not commented when the article was published.

The CRPF, or Central Reserve Police Force, is a central armed force used for internal-security duties. CAPF means Central Armed Police Forces, a broader group of central security forces that includes the CRPF. Delhi Police is the police organisation responsible for policing in Delhi. The article identifies both Delhi Police and CAPF personnel in the complaint.

The NHRC, or National Human Rights Commission, receives and examines alleged human-rights violations. The NCW, or National Commission for Women, addresses complaints and issues affecting women. Solanki sent his complaint to both bodies, as well as Delhi Police, seeking action and investigation.

These institutions have different roles but can address overlapping concerns. The NHRC focuses on rights violations, while the NCW brings a gender-focused perspective. Police and force authorities can examine conduct internally. The article states that the CRPF is the largest component of forces deployed in Delhi.

The article describes the CRPF as the largest component among security forces deployed in Delhi. That means the force has a particularly substantial presence in the city’s security arrangements. Its size matters because conduct by a large deployed force can affect many public interactions during protests and other events.

No exact strength is provided. The article does not state how many CRPF personnel are deployed, how many other forces are present, or the percentage represented by the CRPF. Therefore, the comparison is qualitative rather than numerical. It establishes that the CRPF is the biggest component, not the precise margin.

This context gives added importance to allegations involving CAPF personnel. It also explains why the CRPF’s response could matter in public accountability. The article records that the CRPF had not yet commented. Any assessment still depends on investigation and verification of the alleged incidents.

Social-media clips can show only selected moments, and their authenticity or completeness may be uncertain. Solanki therefore avoided presenting the three videos as final proof. His complaint expressly said he had not independently verified the footage. That caution separates an allegation from an established finding.

He requested an impartial investigation and forensic verification. He also asked authorities to examine the complete incident footage and relevant circumstances. This process could clarify what happened before and after the clips, identify the people involved, and test whether the videos were fabricated or materially manipulated.

The request protects the fairness of the process in two directions. Genuine misconduct could be properly documented, while misleading or altered material would not automatically determine guilt. The article says Solanki sought appropriate action only if the allegations were substantiated, rather than assuming the videos proved them.

If an investigation substantiates the allegations, Solanki asked for appropriate legal and departmental action. That could apply to personnel who allegedly mistreated women and to supervisory officers found responsible. The complaint therefore seeks accountability for both direct conduct and relevant supervisory responsibility.

The proposed process begins with impartial investigation, forensic verification and examination of complete footage. Authorities would compare the video evidence with other circumstances before deciding whether the allegations are supported. The article does not name specific offences, penalties or disciplinary measures, so the exact consequences remain undetermined.

If the material is found fabricated or materially manipulated, Solanki requested a different response. He said appropriate legal action and removal of misleading content could be pursued in accordance with law. Thus, the complaint seeks action on either outcome, while leaving the factual determination to verification and investigation.

The NHRC can examine alleged human-rights violations, and the NCW can consider complaints involving women’s safety and treatment. Delhi Police and the relevant force can conduct departmental inquiries, preserve evidence and identify personnel. Independent investigation is important because the complaint concerns state personnel and disputed video evidence.

Courts can require senior officers to appear, explain alleged conduct and respond to requests for safeguards. The article reports that the Supreme Court sought the personal presence of a senior Delhi Police officer after a petition by the Network of Women in Media, India. Police oversight can also include reviewing command responsibility and training needs.

The article does not specify a single investigation procedure or outcome. Solanki requested forensic verification, complete footage review and gender-sensitivity training. Together, these steps could test the evidence, establish responsibility and reduce repeated mistreatment, while keeping any action tied to verified facts and lawful process.

Protests depend on people being able to assemble and express views without unlawful intimidation or violence. Women protesters and journalists may face particular risks during crowd-control operations. The article reports videos of women being manhandled, a molestation accusation against a Delhi Police officer, and alleged assaults on women journalists.

Safeguards can include clear conduct standards, gender-sensitive training, identification of personnel and accessible complaint channels. They should support lawful policing while preventing unnecessary physical contact or retaliation. For journalists, safeguards also protect the ability to document protests and report events. The article says the NWMI petition sought protections for journalists covering protests, particularly women journalists.

The need is immediate because allegations involve both police and non-police actors. Four men from a right-wing group were caught on tape assaulting protesters and later arrested. Training, oversight and court-ordered safeguards can help address misconduct while preserving peaceful assembly and reporting, subject to verified evidence and lawful procedures.