That Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha, himself had to go to Police Station to get an FIR registered in the case of pellet gun injuries suffered by Sahil Lochab during the protest march to Parliament on the 20 July, reflects very poorly of the functioning of the police.
Lochab perhaps was compelled to approach Rahul Gandhi after he had failed in his multiple attempts to get the FIR filed after his discharge from the hospital.
Refusal of the police to lodge FIR in this case is against the provisions of law.
Pellet gun is a dangerous weapon, as per Section 118 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and voluntarily causing hurt or grievous injury through its use is a cognisable offence. This makes it incumbent upon the police to lodge an FIR when use of it is reported. The Delhi Police should have filed a FIR ab-initio.
By doing so, the police could have avoided the eventuality of the LoP to accompany Lochab to police authorities and threatening dharna and thus creating negative optics for the Government of India.
Govt Appears Cornered on Police Brutality
That Lochab had to seek help of the LoP and, the fact that even the LoP had to run from pillar to post for filing the FIR, exemplifies the difficulty a common person today faces while dealing with police. Reluctance of police to register in all probability emanates from a lack of political direction in that regard.
That police yielded eventually, only because the political executive got worried due to adverse optics being created due to the live streaming of the exchanges between him and the police authorities and the threat by Gandhi to go on indefinite dharna. This would further have brought into focus the atrocious handling of the protests by the government and police.
The force used by the police was excessive to say the least. In fact, incidents like discovery of a truck filled filed the stones—reports suggest that this was earlier seized by Delhi Police and was in their custody—besides vehicles with broken windows etc along the route of protest march suggest the intentions to disrupt the peaceful march into a violent one. Who ordered the truck and broken vehicles to be so parked remains a mystery.
The political executive continues to maintain steadfast silence on the allegation of excessive use of force by Police and other forces involved in controlling the protest march. The monsoon session of the Parliament witnessed almost a wash out on this issue and the insistence of Opposition that Home Minister make a statement and clarify as to who ordered use of pellet guns on protesting students. In that context, the FIR filed by Locan is a significant one.
Delhi Police had been denying use of pellet guns, hiding behind the fig leaf of technicality: that they were not authorised this weapon for use, hence, there was no question of any injury due to use of pellet guns.
The claims were challenged when a “General Diary” entry indicating that the Rapid Action Force (RAF) had fired a pellet gun on orders of the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) surfaced. The Police claims were further belied when the LoP produced some students who had suffered pellet injuries during the 20 July protest demonstration outside Prime Minister's house.
Statements by union ministers, including Kiren Rijiju, that no person was killed or had their bones broken during the protests, is a poor attempt to cover up for the incompetent handling of the protests by the Delhi police. That the police misbehaved with women and used excessive force on the protesters is amply established by large numbers videos on the social media.
That the government is concerned about these incident can perhaps be read in the court verdicts and directions since the protests.
Facing slack for the Chief Justice of India's comments on "cockroaches", and later his tone-deaf dismissal of a plea against police violence, the Supreme Court formed a five-member, high-powered committee led by a former judge to investigate allegations of excessive police force and violence against protesters (such as those demonstrating over the NEET exam and CJP issues). The court is looking into the use of methods like pellet guns and tear gas, and prioritising complaints of sexual assault against women.
The court has also restrained authorities from taking coercive action against students who participated in demonstrations and indicated it may use its extraordinary powers to quash protest-related FIRs against them
Damage Control Mode for BJP
The reported instructions said to have been issued by the police authorities to remain calm in face of protesting youth so asa to not end up as "meme" content, should have come much earlier.
And though they appear welcome, these instructions do not seem to have been inspired by a genuine desire to be people-friendly but rather a bid to not get "cancelled" in this age of social media when everyone has a camera in hand that they use to live stream the happenings on ground.
Hopefully these instructions would encourage Delhi Police to mend their ways and shed the notoriety that they have earned of using brute force and extra-legal methods like deploying people in civil dress etc against protesters particularly during the last decade or so.
Continued insistence by Rahul Gandhi on fixing accountability for use of brute force by Delhi police, especially the act of going along with the victim to the police station to lodge an FIR with Lochan has gone down well with the youth of India, as seen in the support he received on social media, which constitutes almost 65 percent of the population of India.
The atrocious handling of the Gen-Z protests by the government has resulted in a precipitation of the accumulated feelings of alienation with government policies the youth and population in general had been harbouring for some time without any outlet to express.
The young population of India were toddlers or preteens when the present Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government assumed power.
Disillusioned, Online Youth
Having been brought up in the age of internet they have easy access to information. The proliferating independent media channels have gone a long way in disseminating actual real time information.
There is widespread mistrust of mainstream media as it is increasingly alleged to behave like a propaganda tool of the government and hide the failures of policies and their implementation.
The information age has brought in consciousness not only amongst youth but also other strata of society about the strides that other countries—including some countries having much smaller GDP than that of India—have made in development of infrastructure and also improving the Human Development Index. On the other hand, India continues to languish way behind with 800 million people surviving on a dole of five Kg ration every month.
The Opposition, led by Gandhi, as well as pressure groups' like Abhijeet Dipke's Cockroach Janta Party, have thus been focused on bread and butter issues like education, pitiable condition of government-run schools, unemployment, high cost of living, corruption, poor condition of infrastructure and bad governance.
These issues have caught the imagination of the masses, pushing the government into a defensive position and not one the BJP has been used to maneuvering in the past few years. Efforts to divert attention by raising controversies/issues like “Vande Mataram” or “Dimagi Naxal” seem to be falling flat.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP Government has had an extended honeymoon period which now appears to be ending. Initiatives like deputing ministers to go and interact with youth are not likely to yield much benefits for the party unless these are accompanied by actual results and change on ground.
The youth of today is aspirational and is unwilling to wait till 2047 to see a Viksit Bharat. And Rahul’s politics of streets is gaining momentum.
(Sanjiv Krishan Sood (Retd) has served as the Additional Director General of the BSF and was also with the SPG. He tweets @sood_2. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.