‘Groped and pushed’: Women allege sexual harassment while being detained during Delhi protests

Women protesters alleged that Delhi Police officers used force and sexually inappropriate contact while detaining them. Their accounts included groping, touching breasts, targeting private parts, dragging women by their hair, and holding one woman by the throat. These allegations matter because detention should not become an occasion for sexual abuse or unnecessary violence.

Juliya described a detention on October 11. She said female officers pushed and dragged her by the hair, held her throat, and ignored her complaints. At the bus entrance, she said, a male officer groped her breasts and pushed her inside. Other protesters reported similar contact during recent protests.

The police were also accused of using force against women during October 10 protests. Delhi Police had not responded to Scroll’s questions when the article was published. Complaints, court challenges, and demands for accountability could follow, while the allegations have intensified scrutiny of protest policing.

Sexual harassment generally means unwanted sexual behavior that violates a person’s dignity or makes them feel unsafe. It can include sexual touching, groping, or targeting intimate body parts. Legitimate physical restraint has a different purpose: stopping someone from escaping, preventing immediate harm, or completing a detention through necessary and proportionate force.

The article describes allegations that make this distinction clear. Juliya said female officers pushed and dragged her toward a bus, but a male officer allegedly groped her breasts while forcing her inside. Protesters also accused officers of hitting breasts and targeting private parts. Those acts were described as sexual assault or harassment, not ordinary restraint.

Whether conduct was lawful would depend on the circumstances and applicable law. The article reports allegations, not a final legal finding. Delhi Police had been contacted for a response, and the allegations could be examined through complaints, investigations, and court proceedings.

The article describes protests as involving large groups, but it provides only one precise participant count. On October 11, 22 members of the Students Federation of India gathered at Connaught Place around 6.30 pm. They were protesting alleged police brutality during the previous day’s demonstration.

The October 10 action was broader. A large group of students and other protesters marched toward Dilli Haat after police restrictions prevented them from gathering at Jantar Mantar. The article also says more women participated in the October protests than in a July protest, but it gives no overall number.

The available figures show organized participation, not the full scale of the movement. Police arrived about 30 minutes after the SFI group gathered and began detaining them. The protests drew political groups, unaffiliated students, journalists, and political leaders, suggesting a widening coalition, though no complete attendance figure is provided.

Students and other protesters were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The article identifies this as the protest’s central political demand, but it does not explain what actions or decisions led them to seek his resignation. That missing context limits what can be concluded about the demand itself.

Police restrictions shaped the demonstration. Heavy barricades and restrictions prevented protesters from gathering at Jantar Mantar by the afternoon of October 10. Neha Bora then announced that “Dilli Haat becomes Jantar Mantar today!” A large group marched toward the South Delhi market, where protesters continued pressing their demand.

The confrontation also shifted attention toward policing. Protesters alleged illegal detentions, disproportionate force, and sexual harassment of women. On October 10, RJD MP Manoj Jha approached the Supreme Court over those issues. The article therefore connects the resignation demand with a wider dispute about protest rights and police conduct.

Allegations of illegal detention, excessive force, and sexual harassment can trigger formal complaints, investigations, judicial review, and demands for accountability. They can also affect public trust in the police and the state’s ability to manage peaceful protest fairly. Any penalties or findings would depend on evidence and legal proceedings.

The article records several steps already taken. Three reporters filed complaints alleging sexual harassment by a Delhi police officer. Tanushree Pande filed a complaint after alleging that an officer jabbed a lathi into a woman protester. On October 10, RJD MP Manoj Jha approached the Supreme Court, alleging disproportionate force, illegal detentions, and sexual harassment.

The Delhi Police was contacted for responses to the October 10 allegations, but had not replied when the article was published. The reporters who complained also faced a case under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act after the officer accused them of casteist remarks. Further outcomes were not stated.

The Delhi Police controlled access, deployed barricades, detained protesters, and faced allegations of excessive force and sexual harassment. Its conduct is central because police were responsible for managing the demonstrations and the treatment of people in custody. The article also records that the police had not responded to the allegations when published.

Protest organizers helped mobilize opposition. Neha Bora announced the shift from Jantar Mantar to Dilli Haat and led protesters toward the market. Students, including AISA and SFI members, joined demonstrations. Journalists documented events and filed complaints; three reporters also faced a police officer’s counter-allegation of casteist remarks.

Political leaders brought the dispute into court. RJD MP Manoj Jha approached the Supreme Court, challenging the police response. The Court’s role, as presented here, is to hear that challenge. The article does not state any final ruling or other outcome.

The right to peaceful assembly means people can gather, express political demands, and protest collectively without violence. In a democracy, the state must protect that space while addressing genuine safety concerns. Police may manage routes, prevent violence, and detain people when legally justified, but their actions should be necessary, proportionate, and respectful.

The article shows why those duties matter. Barricades prevented protesters from gathering at Jantar Mantar, so Neha Bora redirected the march to Dilli Haat. During later detentions, protesters alleged pushing, dragging, groping, and other physical abuse. Manoj Jha challenged the police handling, alleging disproportionate force, illegal detentions, and sexual harassment.

A democratic response requires clear rules, accountable officers, and meaningful investigation of complaints. Police should protect protesters, including women, rather than expose them to abuse. The article records scrutiny, complaints, and a Supreme Court challenge, but it does not report a final ruling or confirmed findings.