Skip to main content

Delhi riots: Saffron report admits cop failure, blames 'Left-jehadi' guerrilla tactics

  
By Rajiv Shah 
A new “fact-finding” report, taking a line similar to that of Union home minister Amit Shah, who has termed Delhi riots “pre-planned” and “part of a conspiracy”, has admitted that “the police and law enforcement agencies were on a back-foot” during the riots which have claimed more than 50 lives, rendering hundreds injured and thousands homeless.
Suggesting that the police failed to respond effectively because they were faced with “large number of rioters who were also armed”, the 51-page “Delhi Riots 2020 - Report from Ground Zero: Shaheen Bagh Model in North-East Delhi, From Dharna to Danga”, says these were planned riots by “Left-wing jehadis”, who were using “seemingly imposed” and “totally out of context” language” and “idiom, picked up from “some revolutionary manual from some university classroom.”
Claiming to have seen “a range of locally made arms were used by the rioters” in North-East Delhi, and suggesting this points to “expertise in Guerilla warfare”, the fact-finding team says, “Riot weapons were stockpiled over a period of time. There are evidences of use of high rise buildings in the areas as sites for launching petrol bombs, Molotov cocktails”. Also, there were “huge sized catapults capable of launching bricks."
Further claiming that “armed jehadi mobs targeted the Delhi police and civilians alike”, the report says, as a result of this “life of common citizens was “endangered”, one reason why the latter too “had to resort to self-defense in the face of rioting mobs.”
Prepared by “group of intellectuals and academicians" – Supreme Court advocate Monika Arora, and three Delhi University assistant professors – Dr Prerna Malhotra, Sonali Chitalkar, Dr Shruti Mishra, and Divyansha Sharma – the report contends that the riots were also a planned in order to implement the theoretical framework of a pro-poor American community leader Saul Alinsky (1909-72), urban Naxal and CPI (Maoist) “strategy and tactics”, and the Dantewada “model”, even as using “grievances of communities to engineer revolution.”
Without once recalling the role reportedly played by BJP leader Kapil Mishra in provoking the Delhi riots on day one (February 23), the report puts the blame on the “Shaheen Bagh model”, whose content “was a mixture of Left-wing Jihadi and anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC), and National Population Register (NPR) activism”, and had an “anti-Amit Shah, anti-Modi, anti-fascist rhetoric”.
The crowds of rioters were very well prepared to conceal their identities with many wearing helmets and had blackened their faces
Terming Shahin Bagh protests “anti-Hindu, anti-India, anti-police and anti-government”, the report says, the sites where protests took place had “revolutionary slogans” painted on the wall, even as “azadi, anti-government rhetoric, dangers of fascism slogans” were raised on public address systems.
Explaining the anti-Hindu nature of the slogans and posters, the report claims where were images of the Holy Swastika and Om depicted in a “derogatory manner”, adding: “Ma Kaali, the Hindu goddess, and women wearing bindis were shown in burkhas”, adding, “While on the one hand Islamic slogans were raised repeatedly, locals also reported Pakistan zindabad slogans being raised.”
“All this was being done with the Constitution and the Indian national flag in the backdrops”, the report asserts, even as blaming, like the Union home minister, the outsiders for rioting, but wonders who these were. Suggesting that the outsiders came from Uttar Pradesh, the report says, “In North East Delhi some gallis open out into what is technically Uttar Pradesh. There is no sealed border.”
Stating that the crowds of rioters were “very well prepared to conceal their identities” with many wearing “helmets and had blackened their faces”, the report says, “The outside influence is most palpable when one visits the sites of anti-CAA protest that have now been removed.”
Blaming the outsider influence on the “involvement of a revolutionary network that engineered and managed the riot situation”, the report particularly names the feminist organization Pinjra Tod for “instigating violence”, as also “women students from the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU)” for “constantly instigating crowds over a period of weeks before February 23.”
Front cover of the report
Criticising the claim that were “democratic and organic”, the report says, “We have been told that peaceful high-decibel protests on publicly funded university campuses and public roads are democratic protest. This is a narrative that has been carried by the Urban-Naxals-Jihadis and their left-liberal fronts in the national and international media, civil society, political parties and the bureaucracy.”
Questioning the democratic nature of the anti-CAA, NPR and NRC protests, the report says, “In a democratic protest the organization leading it can be clearly identified. Such protests are conducted within the rule of law. They respect the right of persons who are not engaging in debate. Democratic protests cannot deliberately target and provoke a particular community that is largely peaceful and respects diversity.”
 Armed jehadi mobs targeted Delhi police and civilians, one reason why the latter had to resort to self-defense in the face of rioting mobs
Contradicting itself about the planned nature of the protests, the report at another place says: “We found that these protests have no single identifiable face or organization. Thus everyone in the protests is an independent voice. Shaheen Bagh protesters are at pains to deny any association with Sharjeel Imam who is a major face in anti-CAA protests since its inception.”
Yet, it blames Popular Front of India (PFI), said to be an extremist and militant Islamic fundamentalist organization, and the All India Students' Association (AISA), a left-wing student organisation of the Communist Party of India Liberation, saying, they together “specialize in violent, one-sided irrational, disruptive and undemocratic movements that are based on fear-mongering.”
Stating that all this is happening “under the under the cover of Constitutional values and democratic right to protest”, the report also indicated involvement of those who have “captured” campuses of major institutes like the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), Hyderabad Central University (HCU), Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Chennai, JNU, Osmania University, Jadhavpur University and Delhi University.
---
All photos screenshots from the report

Comments

TRENDING

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha*  This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra  When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman*  The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative   The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor*  This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

'Structural sabotage': Concern over sector-limited job guarantee in new employment law

By A Representative   The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has raised concerns over the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (VB–G RAM G), which was approved during the recently concluded session of Parliament amid protests by opposition members. The legislation is intended to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative   Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

India’s Halal economy 'faces an uncertain future' under the new food Bill

By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  The proposed Food Safety and Standards (Amendment) Bill, 2025 marks a decisive shift in India’s food regulation landscape by seeking to place Halal certification exclusively under government control while criminalising all private Halal certification bodies. Although the Bill claims to promote “transparency” and “standardisation,” its structure and implications raise serious concerns about religious freedom, economic marginalisation, and the systematic dismantling of a long-established, Muslim-led Halal ecosystem in India.