Delhi Police to SC: Facial recognition at NEET protests was legitimate, not surveillance

The Delhi Police has told the Supreme Court that the use of facial recognition technology (FRS) during the NEET-UG paper leak protests in July was a “legitimate, bona fide and proportionate policing measure”, and not indiscriminate surveillance of peaceful protestors.

In an affidavit filed in response to petitions alleging excessive force and surveillance during the protests at Jantar Mantar, the police said the technology was deployed in “legitimate State interest”. The protest, which began after alleged irregularities in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET-UG), saw large crowds gather on July 20. The Supreme Court is now examining the police action, and has proposed a committee to investigate the use of force.

The police stated that FRS was used only to identify individuals with criminal antecedents, not to profile every person present. According to the affidavit, the system found 2,873 persons with serious criminal records, of whom 92 were involved in over 10 cases and 47 were history-sheeters. Their offences range from murder and rape to narcotics and child sexual abuse.

Addressing concerns about data collection, the police denied that biometrics were obtained from protestors or that data was shared with private entities. “A false narrative is being built to the effect that based upon the FRS, biometrics of everyone and anyone is obtained, people are being called with their Aadhaar cards and the data is being sold to private entities. Such narrative is built not only falsely but with ulterior motives,” the affidavit said.

On the use of force, the police said the action was “proportionate, reasonable, graded and strictly in accordance with law” to control surging crowds. The affidavit did not specifically address allegations that pellet guns were used by the Rapid Action Force. It maintained that operational decisions in a rapidly evolving situation cannot be judged in hindsight based on isolated video clips or media reports.

The police also defended the deployment of plainclothes officers as “spotters”, describing it as a globally recognised arrangement to keep a vigil on anti-social elements. “These officers had merged with the protestors to avoid being identified by the anti-social elements and criminals and to be in a position to provide immediate assistance to anyone being harassed at the protest site,” the affidavit said.

On the use of tear gas and lathi charge, the police said tear smoke shells were used only as a last resort and the lathi charge was “limited and controlled”. It denied the use of “nail lathis”, saying a video purporting to show such a weapon actually showed a stick possibly used by a protestor to which a National Flag was attached.

The affidavit also denied allegations that police officers manhandled women protestors, terming the petitions as based on “incomplete narration of events and disputed questions of fact”. It noted that the protest at Jantar Mantar was “potentially sui generis” — one of its kind — given the background of the NEET-UG paper leak. The police said the protestors had been granted permission for a small gathering as a one-time exception, but did not vacate the area after the scheduled time, leading to the situation.

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the matter. The Delhi Police has said it will deal with individual allegations against its officers before the committee proposed by the court.