2 weeks ago
Delhi Police denies mass surveillance at Jantar Mantar protests
Some students gathered at a place called Jantar Mantar in Delhi to protest.
Police used a special camera system that can recognize faces.
Some people worried the police were watching everyone at the protest.
The police said they are not watching everyone.
They said the system only looks for people who have committed serious crimes before.
The police told the Supreme Court, the highest court in India, that they found almost 3,000 people with past criminal records at the protest.
They said some criminals had joined the protest and caused trouble, like stealing things.
The police also said they did not collect anyone's private information or sell it to others.
Now the Supreme Court will decide what is right.
Delhi Police filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court rejecting allegations of mass surveillance via facial recognition at last month's Jantar Mantar student protests.
The police said the facial recognition system only captures faces already recorded in previous offences and does not profile peaceful protesters.
The system identified 2,873 individuals with past criminal records, including 47 history-sheeters and 92 involved in more than 10 cases.
Police said the protest was infiltrated by criminals, citing seven motor vehicle thefts, 67 other thefts, and 123 lost reports between July 20 and July 26.
The affidavit dismissed claims of biometric collection, Aadhaar-based summons, and data sale as a false narrative spread with ulterior motives.
The Supreme Court is hearing petitions alleging excessive police force at the protest site.
- Who
- Delhi Police, student protesters, and the Supreme Court of India
- What
- Delhi Police denies allegations of mass facial recognition surveillance during student protests at Jantar Mantar
- Where
- Jantar Mantar, Delhi, India; Supreme Court of India
- When
- Affidavit filed late Monday night, following last month's protests
- Why
- To address petitions alleging excessive police force and clarify that facial recognition was used only to identify people with prior criminal records
Petitioners / Protesters
Delhi Police
Scope of facial recognition
Petitioners / Protesters
Petitions allege mass surveillance and excessive police force against protesters at Jantar Mantar.
Delhi Police
Police say the system does not profile everyone and only captures faces of those already recorded in previous serious offences.
Nature of the protest
Petitioners / Protesters
The protest is characterized as a peaceful student demonstration facing excessive force.
Delhi Police
Police say the protest was infiltrated by criminals and anti-social elements who committed thefts and attacked police personnel.
Biometric and data misuse claims
Petitioners / Protesters
Concerns were raised that biometrics were collected, people were summoned via Aadhaar details, and data was sold to private entities.
Delhi Police
Police call such claims a false narrative built with ulterior motives, stating no images except those of serious offenders are captured.
Key facts
- Document filed
- Counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court
- Individuals identified with criminal records
- 2,873
- Identified via Crime Kundli database
- 2,402
- Identified via dossier records
- 471
- History-sheeters among identified
- 47
- Involved in more than 10 cases
- 92
- Crimes reported July 20–26 near protest site
- 7 motor vehicle thefts, 67 other thefts, 123 lost reports
- Offences cited
- Murder, attempt to murder, dacoity, robbery, rape, POCSO Act offences, crimes against women, Arms Act, kidnapping, snatching, NDPS Act
Quotes
Delhi Police spokesperson
Official representing the Delhi Police
“The facial recognition system does not automatically capture, create, generate or maintain profiles of every individual present at the protest site, nor is it deployed for indiscriminate surveillance or collection of personal information of peaceful protesters unless he has a previous criminal record.”
indianexpress.com
“The facial recognition system only captures those faces which are already recorded in previous offences.”
indianexpress.com










