New Delhi: A major legal controversy has erupted over the alleged participation of minor children in the July 20 protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar against the alleged NEET paper leak, with Advocate Rinki Chatterjee Singh seeking the registration of a Zero FIR under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against CJP organisers Sourav Das and Abhijit Dipke, among others.
The complaint, submitted before the Siliguri Crime Branch in West Bengal, alleges that the organisers endangered children by involving them in a politically charged protest that later witnessed a police lathi-charge. The advocate has sought action under Sections 13, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act, along with Section 153 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Questioning the very presence of a 12-year-old girl at the protest, Advocate Rinki Chatterjee Singh argued that children of such age fall within the category of those requiring special care and protection, making their participation in a volatile demonstration deeply questionable.
#WATCH | Siliguri, West Bengal: On submitting a complaint for registration of a Zero FIR against Saurav Das, Abhijeet Dipke, and CJP organisers under sections of the POCSO Act, Advocate Rinki Chatterjee Singh says, "The FIR was filed over an incident at Jantar Mantar on July 20,… pic.twitter.com/N0GuAenHkH
— ANI (@ANI) August 5, 2026
Speaking after filing the complaint, she said that the protest at Jantar Mantar on July 20 escalated into a confrontation in which police resorted to lathi-charge while slogans and abusive remarks were allegedly raised against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
According to her, the subsequent attempt by protest organisers to highlight alleged police action against minor girls cannot absolve them of responsibility for bringing children into such an environment in the first place.
She questioned who had taken the decision to bring a 12-year-old child to a protest that carried the risk of violence and confrontation, arguing that accountability must begin with those who organised and facilitated the participation of minors.
The complaint contends that the organisers should face prosecution under Sections 13, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act, alleging that involving children in such protests amounts to exposing them to circumstances that endanger their welfare.
The lawyer has also sought invocation of Section 153 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, maintaining that the role of the organisers deserves criminal investigation. Her complaint specifically names Sourav Das, Abhijit Dipke, and other organisers associated with the protest.
