Amid allegations of police brutality against CJP protesters in Jantar Mantar, the Delhi Police has defended itself against allegations that it used rubber pellets on protesters and detained men carrying food for protesters at Jantar Mantar.
According to a report by the Hindustan Times, the medico-legal case (MLC) report of injured protesters says they suffered a “suspected gunshot injury”. The protesters told HT that they were hit by rubber bullets. A protester said his MLC report mentioned “pellet injury mark” with pellet gun at 4 pm.
One of the protesters also said he suffered a pellet injury in his right eye, which required surgery. “Another surgery is going to be done on the sclera part of Sahil’s eye to save it,” a protester told HT.
However, the Delhi Police officially denied using pellet or rubber guns. “The RAF has anti-riot gear that includes a pellet gun. They may have carried it during the protest, but we can’t comment on CRPF and their weapons,” a senior police officer at Delhi Police headquarters told Hindustan Times.
As for the CRPF, it said the RAF is mandated to carry anti-riot gear that includes pellet guns and could have used it to control crowds.
The Delhi Police has also reacted to Delhi Police detaining three men carrying food for protesters at the Nizamuddin police station. According to the police, the claims made by CJP’s Saurav Das was “misleading and deceptive”.
South East Delhi DCP Ravi Kumar Singh said on X that the claim of boys being detained for carrying food to Jantar Mantar was "false and misleading." The official claim is that policemen did not stop anyone from carrying food items.
"As part of routine picket/checkpost duty, the vehicle was stopped only to verify the identity of the occupants and to ascertain where they were coming from and where they were going. While the identity cards were being checked, the driver of the vehicle left with the vehicle and the luggage," he added.
On questioning, the occupants of the vehicle stated that food and drinks were being transported to the protest site. “The driver was arranged by a friend of one of the occupants and was not personally known to them. By the time the driver left, the staff deployed there were unaware that the food was being transported to the protesters," he said.
