Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas alleges that Delhi Police and CRPF personnel assaulted him during protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. He seeks an independent, court-supervised investigation into the incident.
John Brittas Approaches CJI Over Alleged Police Assault
Rajya Sabha MP and CPI(M) leader John Brittas has written to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. The John Brittas Police Assault complaint seeks urgent judicial intervention under Article 32 of the Constitution. Brittas alleges that Delhi Police and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel physically assaulted him in New Delhi.
In his representation, Brittas requests the Chief Justice to place his letter before an appropriate Supreme Court Bench.
He also seeks judicial cognizance of the alleged incident and appropriate legal proceedings.
Furthermore, Brittas urges the Court to order an independent investigation into police conduct during protests against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar.
According to Brittas, an internal police inquiry cannot ensure accountability when the allegations concern police personnel and their superiors.
He argues that an independent investigation would help establish the circumstances surrounding the incident.
Brittas Questions Police Conduct During CEC Protest
In his letter, Brittas raises concerns about the alleged use of force against peaceful protesters.
He maintains that authorities cannot respond to political demands through physical violence.
Moreover, he argues that law enforcement agencies must respect constitutional freedoms during public demonstrations.
Brittas states:
“A credible investigation cannot be left exclusively to a chain of command whose personnel or supervisory officers may themselves be implicated… The authorities may agree or disagree with these demands, but they cannot answer them with physical violence. The Government cannot intimidate democracy into silence. It cannot deploy the police as an instrument of political retaliation.”
Through these submissions, Brittas questions the conduct of Delhi Police and CRPF personnel.
He also seeks judicial scrutiny of the alleged actions.
Alleged Assault at Connaught Place on October 11
Brittas describes an incident that allegedly occurred around 12:30 PM on October 11.
According to his representation, he learned about the assault and detention of youth activists.
Consequently, he travelled to the Connaught Place area in New Delhi.
He intended to address media personnel regarding the developments.
However, Brittas alleges that security personnel confronted him despite his peaceful conduct.
He claims that he repeatedly identified himself as a sitting Member of Parliament.
Media personnel also informed the officers about his parliamentary status, according to the letter.
Nevertheless, Brittas alleges that Delhi Police and CRPF personnel continued to use force against him.
MP Alleges Forcible Dragging and Physical Assault
Brittas provides several details about the alleged incident in his representation.
First, he claims that security personnel forcibly dragged him for approximately 50 metres.
He alleges that officers ignored repeated statements identifying him as a Rajya Sabha MP.
Next, multiple officers allegedly lifted him into the air.
They then carried him into a police transport vehicle, according to his account.
Brittas further alleges that the assault continued inside the vehicle.
He claims that officers pinned him against the seat despite his repeated identification as an elected representative.
Additionally, he states that the personnel disregarded his objections to their conduct.
These allegations form the basis of his request for an independent investigation.
DCP Allegedly Intervenes and Orders Release
Brittas also describes the circumstances surrounding his release.
According to his letter, a Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) intervened after the alleged detention.
The DCP subsequently ordered his release, Brittas claims.
He further states that officers dropped him on the roadside.
Brittas maintains that the DCP considered the detention unlawful.
However, these claims remain allegations within his representation.
He has therefore requested judicial scrutiny to establish the facts and determine responsibility.
Incident Allegedly Violated Supreme Court Directions
Brittas highlights the timing of the alleged assault.
According to his representation, the incident occurred within hours of the Supreme Court’s special Sunday directions.
Those directions concerned detention procedures and restrictions during the Delhi protests.
Brittas refers to the Court’s directions regarding peaceful protesters outside areas covered by Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
He argues that the alleged police action contradicted the Court’s directions.
Furthermore, he seeks examination of whether authorities complied with the legal requirements governing detention and the use of force.
His representation therefore raises concerns about both individual rights and compliance with judicial directions.
Brittas Invokes Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution
Brittas argues that the alleged assault violated several constitutional protections.
He specifically invokes Article 19(1)(a), which protects freedom of speech and expression.
Additionally, he refers to Article 19(1)(b), which protects the right to assemble peacefully without arms.
He also relies on Article 21, which protects life and personal liberty.
According to Brittas, the alleged use of force interfered with his ability to exercise these constitutional rights.
He maintains that police authorities must act within the limits prescribed by law.
Moreover, he argues that political disagreement cannot justify unlawful physical violence.
Letter Refers to Detention of Opposition Leaders
Brittas places the alleged incident within a broader account of police action during the demonstrations.
His representation refers to the earlier detention of former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.
It also mentions actions against other senior opposition leaders.
According to Brittas, these incidents raise concerns about the treatment of political representatives during protests.
He characterises the alleged actions as part of a wider pattern of state high-handedness.
However, his letter presents these assertions as allegations requiring examination.
Brittas consequently seeks an independent investigation rather than an inquiry conducted solely through internal police mechanisms.
Rajya Sabha MP Seeks Court-Supervised SIT Investigation
Brittas requests the Supreme Court to constitute an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT).
He seeks a court-supervised investigation into the alleged assault and detention.
According to his representation, the SIT should include officers who have no connection with Delhi Police or CRPF.
He argues that such independence is necessary to ensure a credible investigation.
The proposed investigation would examine the conduct of individual personnel.
It would also assess whether supervisory officers bear responsibility for the alleged actions.
Furthermore, Brittas requests judicial oversight of the investigation process.
Plea Seeks Time-Bound Status Report
Brittas also requests a time-bound status report from the proposed SIT or another independent investigating agency.
He wants investigators to establish the legal basis for his physical removal.
Additionally, he seeks an examination of the alleged assault inside the police vehicle.
The report should also address the circumstances surrounding his subsequent release.
According to Brittas, these findings would help determine whether officers acted within their lawful authority.
He therefore urges the Court to ensure a transparent and accountable investigation.
Brittas Requests Preservation of CCTV and Video Evidence
The representation also seeks immediate protection of electronic evidence.
Brittas requests directions to preserve CCTV footage from the Connaught Place area.
Moreover, he wants authorities to secure video recordings captured by journalists and bystanders.
He argues that these recordings could help establish the sequence of events.
The footage may also assist investigators in identifying personnel involved in the alleged incident.
Consequently, Brittas seeks preservation of the material before investigators begin examining the allegations.
John Brittas Police Assault Complaint Seeks Judicial Accountability
Through his representation, Brittas urges the Chief Justice of India to initiate appropriate judicial proceedings.
He seeks a court-supervised SIT investigation, a time-bound status report and preservation of electronic evidence.
The complaint concerns the alleged conduct of Delhi Police and CRPF personnel during the October 11 demonstrations.
Brittas maintains that authorities must respect constitutional freedoms while maintaining public order.
He also argues that independent judicial scrutiny is necessary when allegations involve law enforcement agencies.
The representation seeks accountability for the alleged assault and examination of compliance with Supreme Court directions.
The letter requests judicial intervention. However, the representation itself does not establish that the Supreme Court has ordered an SIT investigation.
