Congress leader and All India Mahila Congress President Alka Lamba has been convicted by a Delhi court in a criminal case arising from a protest at Jantar Mantar on 29 July 2024, which demanded the implementation of women's reservation ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The Rouse Avenue Court found Lamba guilty, with arguments on the quantum of sentence scheduled for 5 June.

What the Case Is About

The case originates from an FIR registered by the Delhi Police alleging that prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) were in force in the Parliament Street sub-division at the time of the protest. Notably, Jantar Mantar itself was designated an exempted area for demonstrations — making the specific route taken by protesters a central point of contention.

According to the prosecution, Lamba, who served as the main speaker at the rally, along with other demonstrators moved beyond the permitted protest site towards Tolstoy Road, raised slogans, and attempted to march towards Parliament despite repeated warnings from police officials.

What the Court Found

At the charge-framing stage, the trial court had observed that video footage played in open court showed Lamba allegedly pushing police personnel, instigating protesters to jump barricades, and leading demonstrators beyond the permissible protest zone. The court held a prima facie case under four sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): Section 132 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant), Section 221 (obstructing a public servant), Section 223(a) (disobedience to a duly promulgated order), and Section 285 (danger or obstruction in a public way).

The court also rejected the argument that the absence of a medico-legal certificate or injury report created an 'evidentiary vacuum', observing that actual physical injury is not mandatory for offences relating to criminal force.

Earlier Legal Challenges Dismissed

Lamba's plea for discharge was rejected in December 2024, with the court noting that prosecution material must be accepted as true at the charge-framing stage. A subsequent revision plea challenging the framing of charges was dismissed by the Rouse Avenue Court in February 2025.

Additional Sessions Judge Dig Vinay Singh held that there was no 'patent illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error' in the magistrate's order directing that charges be framed. The Sessions Court relied on video footage and police witness statements to conclude that the protest had allegedly gone beyond the exempted area and that protesters breached barricades and obstructed public movement near Sansad Marg.

Delhi High Court Proceedings Continue

Separately, the Delhi High Court is hearing Lamba's plea seeking the quashing of the FIR, chargesheet, and the order framing charges against her. In February 2025, a bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice to the Delhi Police on the petition and sought its response, listing the matter for further hearing on 3 September.

In her High Court plea, Lamba has contended that the prosecution amounts to excessive criminalisation of a peaceful political protest and that continuation of the proceedings would result in a 'serious miscarriage of justice'. The sentencing hearing at the trial court on 5 June will be a closely watched development, given the parallel High Court proceedings.