Delhi Police custody allegations involving purported assault, forced access to a mobile phone and denial of medical assistance to detainees have surfaced after a protest near Connaught Place, according to a report by Millennium Post. The allegations could not be independently verified, and Delhi Police had not responded to the newspaper’s queries at the time of publication.
The person making the allegations said he had taken part in a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. In a video circulating on social media, the protester claimed that male police personnel dragged a couple near Connaught Place and that members of the public intervened after witnessing the incident. He said the people involved were subsequently detained and taken to an isolated location where media personnel and other civilians were not allowed.
According to the account reported by Millennium Post, detainees were made to sit in rows and police personnel selectively asked them to hand over their mobile phones. The protester alleged that an inspector forced one detainee to provide a phone password, after which police personnel searched the gallery and deleted photographs and videos, including files in the recently deleted folder. He further claimed that the detainee was slapped several times for refusing to cooperate.
The protester also alleged that detainees were assaulted inside a police van. He claimed that people were taken individually into a compartment and slapped, kicked and beaten, with some allegedly kicked in their private parts. The group was later taken to a police station and then to another location, where their details were recorded, according to the account.
The allegations also raised concerns about the treatment of minors and injured detainees. The protester claimed that four minors were present in one compartment and appeared frightened, but that police personnel did not attend to them for nearly two hours despite having recorded their details. He also alleged that a detainee with a fractured hand was denied first aid despite repeated requests, although assistance was later offered.
The account further claimed that internet connectivity was shut off, limiting the detainees’ ability to bring the alleged incident to public attention. The report did not establish who disabled connectivity, whether the interruption affected a defined area, or whether any telecommunications or police record supports that claim.
The allegations, if established, would raise questions about the safeguards governing detention, treatment of protesters, access to legal and medical assistance, protection of minors and the handling of personal data stored on mobile devices. However, the supplied report does not contain an official police account, medical records, detention documents, court filings or an independent verification of the video or the claims made in it.
Millennium Post identified its source as a person who purportedly took part in the protest and attributed the allegations to statements made in the circulating video. The newspaper said the charges could not be independently verified and that Delhi Police did not respond to multiple queries. Any assessment of the claims therefore remains dependent on further evidence, including an official response and documentation from the people who were allegedly detained.
The next verifiable developments would include a response from Delhi Police, confirmation of whether complaints were filed, and any available medical, custody or judicial records relating to the alleged detentions and injuries.
