Delhi Police Protest: Five Demands After ACP Suspension

Delhi Police Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Manasvi Vashishta has been suspended following a protest by around 500 police personnel outside the force’s headquarters on Monday. The demonstration came a day after the protesting officers submitted five demands, including the formation of a grievance redressal committee, a standard operating procedure (SOP) for handling confrontations involving lawyers and better security for police personnel inside courtrooms.

The protest followed the transfer of Vashishta and Arun Kumar, the station house officer (SHO) of Shahdara police station, after lawyers called for an indefinite strike over the police response to an assault case involving advocate Lalit Bansal.

ACP Manasvi Vashishta Suspended After Police Protest

Vashishta led the demonstration outside the Delhi Police headquarters on Jai Singh Road in New Delhi. The protest continued for more than 10 hours, with a delegation of police personnel meeting senior officers, including Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, twice during the day.

The demonstration reflected growing dissatisfaction among sections of the police force over the transfers of Vashishta and SHO Arun Kumar. Both officers were transferred after lawyers raised objections to the handling of the assault case involving Bansal.

Vashishta was suspended a day after the protest, which saw around 500 police personnel gather outside the headquarters to raise concerns about the action taken against the officers.

Delhi Police Personnel Put Forward Five Demands

The protesting personnel submitted five demands to senior police officials, focusing on the handling of disputes involving lawyers, protection of police officers and internal grievance procedures.

• Protection of the FIR: The FIR registered on Vashishta’s complaint against lawyers should not be quashed.
• Grievance redressal committee: A committee should be established to address complaints and concerns raised by police personnel.
• Standard operating procedure: A clear SOP should be framed for dealing with confrontations involving lawyers.
• Restrictions inside police offices: The number of lawyers allowed to enter a police officer’s office at one time should be regulated.
• Courtroom security: Police personnel should receive adequate security while appearing or working inside courtrooms.

Vashishta said the officers wanted to meet the police commissioner and called for clear procedures to handle disputes involving members of the legal fraternity.

“Our demands are clear. We need to meet CP sir. There needs to be an SOP (standard operating procedure) to deal with such matters. If this happens to us, how will we fight to save the people of the city,” Vashishta said, according to an earlier Hindustan Times report.

Dispute Began After October 23 Assault in Shahdara

The dispute between the police and lawyers began after an altercation involving two sides in east Delhi’s Shahdara on October 23. Advocate Lalit Bansal sustained a head injury during the incident.

An FIR was subsequently registered at Shahdara police station based on a complaint filed by advocate Amulya Ratan. Lawyers later alleged that Vashishta and SHO Arun Kumar had threatened advocates who visited the police station seeking action against those accused in the assault case.

The allegations prompted lawyers to call an indefinite strike, escalating tensions between the legal fraternity and the police force. The transfers of the ACP and SHO subsequently triggered dissatisfaction among police personnel.

Vashishta Says Protest Was Against Misuse of Power

In a video message released on Sunday, Vashishta said the planned gathering was not directed against advocates but against people who misuse their authority.

His statement came amid growing disagreement over the handling of the Bansal assault case and the action taken against the police officers involved.

A police sub-inspector who participated in Monday’s gathering questioned why the officers were facing disciplinary action despite the existence of video evidence that he claimed showed the assault.

“There is a 30 minute video in which men wearing black coats were seen assaulting the ACP and the SHO and still, a transfer order has come for them. If we are wearing body cams and there is proof that we are not in the wrong, then why are we facing action?” he said.

Police-Lawyer Tensions Raise Questions Over Security and Accountability

The confrontation has brought attention to the procedures followed when disputes arise between police personnel and lawyers inside police stations or court premises. The five demands submitted by the protesting officers seek clearer rules for handling such situations, along with safeguards for police personnel.

The suspension of Vashishta has added another development to the dispute, which began with the October 23 altercation in Shahdara and expanded after lawyers called for a strike.

The competing allegations and demands have placed the police administration under pressure to address concerns raised by both sides while the disciplinary and legal proceedings surrounding the incident continue.