Lathi-charge, tear gas at CJP protests: Police can disperse a crowd. Law doesn't say how much force it can use

The HinduIndependentProgressive9 hr. ago

Students affiliated with the Students Federation of India (SFI), a faction linked to the Communist Party of India (Marxist), organized statewide protests in Kerala on July 23, 2026, over alleged irregularities in the NEET-UG entrance exam. The demonstrations, which were conducted in multiple districts including Malappuram, Thrissur, Kochi, and Palakkad, were carried out in solidarity with protests in New Delhi led by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP). Protesters marched toward government offices and post offices, facing police interventions involving water cannons and tear gas. The protests became confrontational in several areas, with activists refusing to disperse despite police efforts. Notable incidents included clashes in Kochi where protesters scaled barricades and in Palakkad where activists attempted to enter post office compounds. The Leader of the Opposition, Pinarayi Vijayan, inaugurated a state-level protest march in Thiruvananthapuram.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the protests as a legitimate expression of dissent against the Union government, particularly the BJP-led administration, and highlights the actions of the SFI, which is associated with the CPI(M), a left-wing political party. The emphasis on police brutality, demands for the oust

Hindustan TimesIndependentCenter15 hr. ago

Allegations of police brutality during protests organized by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Delhi have reignited discussions about the legal boundaries governing the use of force by law enforcement during crowd dispersal. While Indian law permits the police to maintain public order, courts have emphasized that such actions must adhere to constitutional principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality. However, the legal framework remains fragmented, with operational guidelines for crowd control—such as lathi-charges and tear gas—being dictated primarily by state-specific police laws, manuals, and executive orders. This lack of uniformity leads to differing practices across regions and results in case-by-case determinations regarding the use of force and accountability. The Constitution guarantees the right to protest under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b), but these rights are subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the state for maintaining public order, security, and national integrity.

Bias read (Center): The article provides a balanced overview of the legal and constitutional aspects surrounding police use of force during protests. It discusses both the rights of protesters and the limitations placed on them by the state, referencing judicial rulings and legal frameworks without showing clear favor.