Recent demonstrations in India have seen increased police intervention, leading to allegations of excessive force amidst a backdrop of public dissent. International bodies have raised concerns over mass detentions and the use of force against protesters.
In recent months, India has witnessed a notable surge in civilian protests, particularly those organized by the ‘cockroach’ youth movement (CJP). These protests have increasingly elicited police intervention, with allegations of excessive force becoming a focal point of concern. Notably, the protests in July and October 2026 have drawn responses from international organizations, including the United Nations and Amnesty International, regarding mass detentions and the use of excessive force by law enforcement.
Petitions have already been filed in the Supreme Court regarding the October protests, asserting claims of mass detentions and the improper use of force. In July, a judicial proceeding led to the establishment of a committee tasked with examining the use of force during student protests, highlighting the growing scrutiny over police practices in the context of public dissent.
Protest Data Overview
According to data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED), India recorded a total of 18,629 demonstrations from January to October 2, 2026. Of these, 17,691 were classified as protests, with the majority categorized as peaceful, while 687 were deemed violent demonstrations. Notably, at least 1,200 protests were met with police intervention.
Delhi has remained a central hub for CJP’s major demonstrations, although the total number of protests in the capital has decreased from 543 in 2016 to 364 in 2026. Conversely, states such as Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh have seen significant increases in protest activity, with Telangana experiencing a surge from 98 demonstrations in 2016 to over 1,324 in 2026.
In August 2026, approximately one out of every eleven demonstrations across India encountered police intervention, with more than 2,500 protests occurring nationwide, including both peaceful protests and those met with police force. This increase in demonstrative activity has coincided with a decade-high number of incidents where police used force, particularly in August 2026.
Legal Framework and Policing Guidelines
While the Indian Constitution protects the right to assembly, a report authored by human rights lawyer Vrinda Grover for the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) indicates that this protection often fails in practice. The decision to intervene in protests lies with executive magistrates or police officers, and a majority of surveyed officers believe they should be permitted to employ force without fear of punishment, as per the Status of Policing in India Report 2025.
Policing in India is primarily a state subject, but the central government can deploy paramilitary forces to assist in maintaining internal security. Guidelines dictate that agencies responsible for dispersing unlawful assemblies must don prescribed uniforms and anti-riot gear to minimize civilian casualties.
Methods of Crowd Control
When police intervention is deemed necessary, Indian policing rules mandate a phased approach, starting with persuasion and warnings before any force is applied. Minimum force should be used and should cease once order is restored. Those who refuse to disperse may be legally detained. However, the adherence to these guidelines remains unclear, and reports suggest that police may not consistently follow them.
Common crowd control methods include the use of barricades, baton charges, water cannons, and tear gas. The use of lathi charges—a colonial-era tactic involving bamboo or polycarbonate batons—has resulted in fatalities, with the Indian National Crime Records Bureau documenting 66 deaths from such actions between 2014 and 2024. Additionally, Human Rights Watch has reported instances where officers used batons against largely peaceful protesters.
Water cannons, which are frequently employed for crowd dispersal, can cause severe injuries. While commonly used in India, high-pressure jets can lead to eye damage and respiratory issues when chemical irritants are added. Tear gas, another commonly deployed measure, is meant to demobilize protesters but poses significant health risks when misused.
Controversial Use of Pellet Guns and Firearms
The use of pellet guns as a crowd-control method remains highly controversial in India. These weapons, which fire metal or plastic pellets, have faced backlash, especially following severe injuries reported during protests in Kashmir. As of now, India’s Supreme Court is evaluating the possibility of banning pellet guns altogether.
Firearms are strictly regulated for use only in extreme circumstances involving imminent danger. The guidelines mandate prior warning and authorization before discharging firearms, and police are required to provide medical assistance to the wounded.
Surveillance and Movement Restrictions
AI-powered surveillance technologies have also been employed during protests. In July 2026, police utilized surveillance vans equipped with facial recognition technology to identify individuals with criminal histories. However, concerns have been raised regarding the accuracy of these systems and potential breaches of privacy rights.
Furthermore, authorities have implemented movement restrictions during protests, including disabling mobile data services and closing metro stations near protest sites. Reports have indicated that individuals were detained away from the protest sites, leading to legal challenges and criticism from human rights groups. The Supreme Court has directed that detentions must adhere to legal standards, particularly for peaceful assemblies.
As public dissent continues to rise in India, the scrutiny of police tactics and their implications for civil rights is likely to intensify. Allegations of excessive force during recent protests are currently under investigation, with human rights organizations calling for accountability and adherence to international standards governing the use of force. The situation remains fluid, as the legal and public discourse surrounding policing and public protests evolves.
