43 hours of protest, no FIR: Congress to take police refusal to court in Rajasthan

Rajasthan Congress leaders occupied the Jaipur Police Commissionerate to demand a Zero FIR against Delhi Police personnel accused of assaulting student leader Ritu Barala. They wanted Rajasthan Police to formally record the complaint, even though the alleged incident occurred in Delhi. The demand mattered because Congress leaders said Barala had been brutally treated during detention and needed a formal investigation.

On Wednesday, Jaipur Police Commissioner Sachin Mittal and a police team told the protesters that they would not lodge the FIR. Govind Singh Dotasra asked police either to register it or to provide written confirmation that BNSS Section 173 did not apply. Police gave that written response. Commissioner Mittal said Barala had already submitted an application to Connaught Place police station, which was being pursued legally.

Congress ended the protest around 1 pm after nearly 43 hours. Dotasra said the party would approach the court and seek an FIR through legal proceedings. Barala also said she would continue seeking justice, arguing that receiving a complaint was different from registering an FIR.

A Zero FIR is a formal record of a cognizable offence that can be registered at any police station, regardless of where the alleged incident happened. It is designed to prevent jurisdictional disputes from delaying immediate police action. After registration, the case can be transferred to the police station or agency with proper territorial jurisdiction. This can be especially important when a victim reaches a different city first.

An ordinary FIR is normally registered at the police station responsible for the area where the offence allegedly occurred. In this case, Congress sought a Zero FIR in Jaipur because Barala’s alleged assault happened during a protest in New Delhi. Jaipur Police instead pointed to her application at Connaught Place police station, where the incident occurred.

The disagreement concerns the correct starting point for the case. Congress says Rajasthan Police should have recorded and transferred the complaint. The commissioner said there were no lawful grounds for a Zero FIR because Delhi police were already pursuing the application.

The Congress protest continued for nearly 43 hours. It was held inside the Jaipur Police Commissionerate, where senior Rajasthan Congress leaders sat and demanded a Zero FIR. The location made the protest direct and highly visible because the party was confronting the police authority from which it wanted formal action.

The protest began around 6 pm on Monday. Govind Singh Dotasra led the Rajasthan Congress leaders who remained inside the Commissionerate. Their demand concerned Delhi Police personnel accused of assaulting Ritu Barala during her detention at a New Delhi protest on October 13. The protest therefore focused on both the alleged treatment of Barala and the question of police jurisdiction.

It ended at about 1 pm on Wednesday, after Jaipur Police said they would not register the requested FIR. Dotasra said Congress would now approach the court. The extended sit-in shows how the dispute moved from a police complaint into a wider political and legal confrontation.

Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita concerns the recording of information relating to cognizable offences and the registration of an FIR. It allows information to be given orally or electronically and does not make territorial location the only starting point for reporting. The provision is intended to make access to police registration more practical for complainants.

Congress leader Govind Singh Dotasra asked Jaipur Police either to register an FIR or to state in writing that Section 173 did not apply. Police gave the requested written response instead of registering the Zero FIR. Commissioner Sachin Mittal said Barala had already submitted an application to Connaught Place police station, and that application was being pursued legally.

The disagreement is therefore about how Section 173 should operate in this situation. Congress says the provision supports recording the complaint in Rajasthan. Jaipur Police says it had no lawful grounds for a Zero FIR because the alleged incident occurred in Delhi and was already before the relevant police station. The party plans court action.

If police refuse to register an FIR, a complainant can pursue legal remedies through a senior police authority and then approach a magistrate or another competent court. The court can examine the complaint and, where legally justified, direct police to register a case or investigate. This route shifts the dispute from an administrative refusal to judicial review.

Here, Dotasra said Congress would approach the court after Jaipur Police gave written confirmation that it would not register the requested FIR. He also said the party would seek an FIR through legal proceedings against those who, in Congress’s view, misinterpreted the law. Barala said she had come to the police as a victim seeking registration, not merely to submit a complaint.

The next step depends on the court’s assessment of the complaint, the alleged assault, and the jurisdiction issue. Jaipur Police maintains that Barala’s application at Connaught Place police station is already being pursued legally. Court proceedings could determine whether further registration or investigation is required.

The alleged assault occurred during Barala’s detention at a protest in New Delhi, but Congress sought an FIR in Jaipur. That creates a jurisdiction question. Delhi Police may be the force expected to investigate conduct allegedly committed by its personnel in Delhi, while Rajasthan Police became the immediate target of the complaint because Barala and Congress leaders sought action there.

A Zero FIR is designed to address this kind of problem. Rajasthan Police could record the complaint first and then transfer it to the police station with territorial jurisdiction. In this case, that could mean forwarding the matter to Connaught Place police station or another relevant Delhi unit. The article says Barala had already given an application to Connaught Place police station.

Because Jaipur Police refused the requested Zero FIR, Congress plans to seek court intervention. The court may consider whether the complaint should be registered in Rajasthan, transferred to Delhi, or handled through the existing Connaught Place application. The dispute could therefore affect both the investigation’s starting point and the agencies involved.

Ritu Barala is a 27-year-old student leader with the National Students’ Union of India. She was born to farmer Mahendra Singh Barala and Anita Devi and has no family members in politics. She became president of Maharani College in 2018, later studied for an MA at Rajasthan University, and served as an NSUI national secretary from 2023.

Barala was allegedly assaulted during her detention at a New Delhi protest on October 13. The protesters were demanding the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and raising the issue of “vote chori.” Afterward, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi asked Rajasthan Congress president Govind Singh Dotasra to get an FIR registered in Rajasthan. Dotasra then led the Commissionerate protest.

The alleged treatment became political because Congress presented it as an attack on a student leader and a failure to provide a formal police remedy. Barala said she was seeking an FIR as a victim. Jaipur Police refused the requested Zero FIR, so Congress now plans to pursue the matter in court.