The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday, 27 October 2026, issued notice to the Centre on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a uniform national protocol for the safety of women police personnel deployed in public-order and protest-management duties. The matter has been tagged with a cluster of related pending petitions and listed for further hearing on 3 November.

The Bench and the Petition

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana admitted the notice on a petition filed by advocate Ashish Gopal Garg, through advocate-on-record (AoR) Shweta Garg. The PIL demands that the Centre frame a comprehensive legal and operational framework addressing three broad concerns: the safety of women police personnel in volatile deployments, the preservation and forensic authentication of electronic evidence including AI-generated material, and an independent redressal mechanism for misconduct allegations against police personnel.

What Prompted the Plea

The petition references recent incidents in New Delhi connected to protests over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The petitioner flagged allegations of violence against police personnel, including women officers and constables, and raised alarm over the circulation of digitally manipulated material on social media that could distort evidence before courts or investigating agencies independently examine it.

Notably, the plea underscores a specific gender dimension to the risk — arguing that women police personnel are repeatedly deployed in crowded and volatile situations where they face dangers distinct from those confronting their male counterparts, yet no published protocol uniformly addresses their safety or provides for reporting and redressal of sexual harassment in the field.

Key Demands in the PIL

The petition has sought the framing of a Women Police Personnel Protection and Protest Management Protocol, along with directions for the mandatory preservation of CCTV footage, body-worn camera recordings, control-room footage, and related electronic evidence. It also calls for a standardised framework for the forensic authentication of disputed digital material, an effective complaints mechanism specifically for women police personnel, and an independent examination of all allegations of misconduct or violence involving police personnel at protests.

The petitioner has argued that the constitutional framework simultaneously obliges the state to protect the right to peaceful assembly and to act against violence, unlawful use of force, and sexual misconduct — both obligations demanding an objective assessment of reliable, authenticated evidence.

Broader Significance

This is not the first time the apex court has been asked to intervene on policing protocols. This comes amid a broader judicial conversation about police accountability and the integrity of digital evidence in an era where manipulated videos and images can rapidly influence public discourse and legal proceedings. The absence of a uniform national framework for women police deployed at protests has long been flagged by civil-society organisations, making the PIL's scope — spanning safety, evidence standards, and redressal — particularly comprehensive.

With the next hearing scheduled for 3 November, the Centre's response will be closely watched, particularly given the ongoing sensitivity around electoral-roll protests and the scrutiny on law-enforcement conduct in the capital.