Rahul Gandhi Stages Sit-In Outside Delhi Police Station, Seeks FIR Over Alleged Pellet Gun Injuries

Yugcharan News / 21 August 2026

New Delhi: Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi staged a sit-in outside the Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi on Friday, demanding that Delhi Police register a First Information Report (FIR) over alleged pellet gun injuries suffered by a young protester during a demonstration on July 20.

Gandhi was accompanied by 19-year-old Sahil Lochab, who has alleged that he was injured by pellet gun fire during police action against protesters. Lochab reportedly sustained injuries to his eyes and abdomen and subsequently underwent treatment, including surgery, at the AIIMS Trauma Centre.

The Congress leader's protest at the police station brought renewed political attention to the police response during the July 20 demonstration. Gandhi said the primary demand was for the police to formally register the complaint and begin an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Lochab's injuries.

Congress Demands Registration of FIR

According to the Congress, Lochab had approached the Delhi Police on August 14 along with his lawyers and submitted a written complaint concerning the alleged use of a pellet gun during the protest. The party said that despite submitting the complaint, the complainant was not provided an acknowledgement or an I/O number.

The Congress further claimed that efforts were made to pursue the matter through email and telephone on August 17, but that the requested acknowledgement and case-related details were still not provided.

Gandhi subsequently accompanied Lochab to the police authorities on Friday to press for action. The Congress said the delegation first went to the Mandir Marg Police Station before proceeding to the Parliament Street Police Station and meeting officials, including the Deputy Commissioner of Police.

Speaking to reporters outside the police station, Gandhi said the family was seeking justice and questioned why the complaint had not resulted in the registration of an FIR.

He maintained that if the Delhi Police were responsible for handling the complaint, the authorities should provide the complainant with the relevant information and take action according to law.

Police Barricade Area Around Station

The situation outside the Parliament Street Police Station became tense as Congress workers and supporters gathered at the location. Police personnel barricaded the area and closed the gates of the station as party workers attempted to move towards the premises while raising slogans.

The Rapid Action Force was also called in as a precautionary measure amid the gathering.

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra later arrived at the police station and joined party workers who were staging a sit-in outside the gates. The presence of senior Congress leaders turned the police station into the centre of a political protest over the handling of the complaint.

The Congress has maintained that the matter involves serious allegations that require an independent and formal investigation. Party leaders have argued that registration of an FIR would allow the authorities to investigate the alleged use of force, establish the circumstances of the incident and determine responsibility, if any.

Lochab's Injuries Become Central to Dispute

Lochab's reported injuries have emerged as one of the key issues in the political dispute surrounding the July 20 protest.

According to the information presented by the Congress, the young protester suffered pellet injuries to his eyes and abdomen. His family has reportedly expressed concern over the possibility of permanent damage to his right eye.

The reported eye injury has intensified demands for an investigation into the use of pellet guns during the demonstration. The Congress has questioned whether such force was justified against protesters and has sought accountability from the authorities.

The allegations, however, remain matters for investigation and cannot by themselves establish individual responsibility. A formal inquiry would be required to determine what happened during the protest, what instructions were issued to the police personnel and whether the force used was consistent with applicable rules and procedures.

Earlier Political Statements

Gandhi had previously raised the issue of alleged pellet gun use during the July 20 protest. On July 29, he addressed the media and alleged that protesting students had been fired upon with pellet guns.

He also criticised the Union government and alleged political responsibility for what he described as excessive action against protesters. The allegations have since become part of a wider political confrontation between the Congress and the government over the handling of the protest.

The July 20 agitation was linked to demands surrounding the NEET paper leak issue. The political dispute intensified in the days that followed, eventually contributing to the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan on July 25.

The controversy has continued to generate political debate, with opposition leaders demanding greater accountability and the authorities facing questions over the police response.

Questions Over Use of Pellet Guns

The alleged use of pellet guns has also raised broader questions about the manner in which security forces respond to large public demonstrations.

Pellet guns can cause serious injuries, particularly when used at close range or in circumstances where projectiles strike sensitive areas such as the eyes or face. Any allegation involving their use during a public protest therefore requires examination of the operational circumstances, the instructions issued to personnel and the applicable use-of-force protocols.

A recent debate over the issue has also involved the legal and operational framework governing the use of such weapons. Questions have been raised about whether the force used was proportionate to the situation and whether alternative methods of crowd management were available.

These questions are particularly significant when injuries are reported among protesters. A transparent investigation can help establish whether the force employed complied with established procedures and whether any individual or institutional responsibility arises from the incident.

Political Pressure on Delhi Police

Friday's protest represents a significant escalation in the Congress's efforts to seek action on Lochab's complaint. By accompanying the alleged victim directly to the police station, Gandhi placed the issue at the centre of public and political attention.

The Congress has argued that the matter concerns a cognisable offence and that an FIR should therefore be registered if the complaint discloses such an offence. The party has also criticised the police for not providing the complainant with an acknowledgement or details concerning the officer handling the complaint.

For the police, the issue involves examining the complaint and determining the appropriate legal course based on the facts and available evidence. The allegations made by political leaders and the complainant will need to be assessed through the established investigative process.

The confrontation outside the police station also highlights the continuing political sensitivity surrounding the July 20 protest. With senior Congress leaders participating directly in the demonstration, the issue has moved beyond an individual complaint and become part of a larger political debate over protest rights, policing and government accountability.

Investigation Likely to Remain Key

The next stage of the dispute is likely to depend on how the Delhi Police respond to the complaint and whether a formal investigation is initiated.

For Lochab and his family, the central demand remains an official examination of how he sustained the injuries and whether the alleged use of a pellet gun was lawful and justified. For the Congress, the issue has become a question of accountability and the right of a protester to seek legal action when serious injuries are allegedly caused during police intervention.

The police response, documentary evidence, medical records, eyewitness accounts and any available video footage could become important in establishing what occurred during the July 20 demonstration.

As political parties continue to exchange allegations, the facts surrounding the incident will ultimately need to be determined through due process. A transparent investigation would be crucial to addressing the concerns raised by the complainant while ensuring that any allegations against police personnel are examined fairly and on the basis of evidence.

For now, Gandhi's sit-in outside the Parliament Street Police Station has brought renewed focus to the alleged pellet injuries suffered during the July 20 protest and the Congress's demand for registration of an FIR. The matter is expected to remain a significant political issue as questions continue over the police response and the accountability mechanisms available to protesters seeking legal remedies.