Women's groups protest outside Delhi Police headquarters against alleged sexual violence during anti-SIR stir

Women’s organisations marched toward Delhi Police headquarters after accusing police of sexual and physical violence against demonstrators. The protest sought accountability for alleged sexual and gender-based violence, highlighting concerns about women’s safety in public life.

Groups including AIDWA, NFIW, AIMSS, AIPWA and ALIFA gathered near Gurudwara Bangla Sahib. They raised slogans and marched to submit a memorandum demanding action against allegedly responsible police personnel. Their statement cited videos, photographs and testimonies, including alleged assaults inside police buses and detention centres.

The organisations said incidents were reported since July 20 and increased from October 2. Annie Raja also demanded Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s resignation, alleging the Centre enabled intimidation. The march linked individual allegations to wider demands for accountability and protection for women, transgender and non-binary protesters in political spaces.

Sexual violence means sexual acts, contact, or conduct imposed without consent, including harassment, unwanted touching, and physical assault. Gender-based violence is directed at someone because of gender, or affects women and gender minorities especially harmfully. These acts violate bodily autonomy and can silence people.

In the article, women’s groups alleged that male police personnel assaulted women demonstrators during anti-CEC protests. They also alleged sexual violence inside police buses and detention centres, while three journalists reported inappropriate touching on October 3. Such conduct can create fear and discourage women, transgender, and non-binary people from protesting.

These claims remain allegations, not findings established in the article. Reports concerned police action since July 20 and reportedly increased after October 2; the Supreme Court called one journalist’s allegations “very serious” on October 15. Accountability requires impartial investigation, protection for complainants, and consequences when wrongdoing is proven.

Five named women’s organisations took part in the march towards Delhi Police headquarters. They protested alleged sexual and physical violence during anti-CEC protests and demanded accountability.

The organisations were AIDWA, NFIW, AIMSS, AIPWA and ALIFA. Collective, SFI and several other women’s and student groups also participated, according to the report. Their involvement showed a broad coalition supporting the allegations.

Protesters assembled near Gurudwara Bangla Sahib before marching to submit a memorandum. The article says alleged violence involved women, transgender and non-binary demonstrators, with reports increasing from October 2. The memorandum sought accountability for the reported sexual and gender-based violence.

The dispute centered on allegations that police used sexual and physical violence during anti-CEC protests in Delhi. Women, transgender, and non-binary demonstrators said police action threatened their safety and public participation. Women’s groups turned those allegations into a collective demand for accountability.

AIDWA, NFIW, AIMSS, AIPWA, ALIFA, student groups, and others marched toward police headquarters. They cited videos, photographs, and testimonies alleging assaults inside police buses and detention centres. Three women journalists separately accused officers of inappropriate touching while covering protests on October 3. Police personnel were therefore both the accused actors and the authorities expected to investigate.

CPI leader Annie Raja accused the Centre and Home Minister Amit Shah of enabling intimidation. She demanded action against officers and Shah’s resignation. ACP Vivek Bhagat, one accused officer, denied wrongdoing and accused a journalist of casteist remarks. No FIR was filed against him, while another man was arrested over a fabricated video. The Supreme Court later called the journalist’s allegations “very serious.”

Alleged sexual violence by police can make protests feel physically unsafe, especially for women, transgender, and non-binary participants. It can discourage women from occupying public spaces, weakening participation and trust in authorities meant to protect them.

In this case, organisations said videos, photographs, and testimonies documented alleged abuse since July 20, increasing after October 2. Three women journalists alleged inappropriate touching while covering an October 3 protest. The accused ACP, Vivek Bhagat, alleged the journalist made casteist remarks; no FIR followed. Such allegations, especially when accountability appears limited, can create fear and silence future witnesses.

The Supreme Court called the allegations “very serious” on October 15; the article reports no FIR against Bhagat. Going forward, transparent investigations, protection for complainants, and consequences for proven abuse are essential. Without them, protesters may withdraw, women may be pushed from public life, and confidence in law enforcement may erode.

In India, alleged police abuse can trigger criminal, departmental, human-rights, and court processes. An FIR starts a criminal investigation; complaints may also go to senior police officers or a magistrate. People can seek an independent inquiry from a human-rights commission, women’s commission, or court, and request disciplinary action against officers.

In this case, women’s groups marched from Gurudwara Bangla Sahib towards police headquarters to submit a memorandum. The article says no FIR had been filed against ACP Vivek Bhagat after a journalist accused him of sexual harassment. On October 15, the Supreme Court called her allegations “very serious.” That scrutiny can strengthen demands for investigation and accountability.

Videos, photographs, and personal testimonies were cited as evidence of alleged violence since July 20. The article does not report an independent inquiry or disciplinary result. Preserving evidence and using multiple routes can keep allegations before investigators, oversight bodies, and judges.

India’s Constitution protects citizens’ right to assemble peacefully and without weapons under Article 19(1)(b). This right lets people gather, march, and voice criticism, though lawful, reasonable restrictions may protect public order under Article 19(3).

A real example is women’s groups’ march from Gurudwara Bangla Sahib toward Delhi Police headquarters. They sought accountability after alleging sexual and physical violence during anti-CEC protests. Police must manage such gatherings neutrally, protect participants, avoid unnecessary force or harassment, and investigate complaints fairly. These duties protect both public safety and the right to dissent.

The article reports videos, photographs, and testimonies alleging violence against women, transgender, and non-binary protesters since July 20. It also says three journalists reported inappropriate touching on October 3, while the Supreme Court called one allegation “very serious” on October 15. These are allegations, not final findings. Going forward, transparent inquiries and safeguards in detention and transport are essential for trust.