‘Who brought a 12-year-old to protest?’ Advocate seeks POCSO case against CJP leaders

Singh has sought action under provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, questioning why a minor was allegedly brought to a demonstration where a lathi-charge took place and where, according to her complaint, abusive language was allegedly used against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the country.

The complaint relates to a protest organised by CJP over the alleged NEET paper leak and irregularities in the education system.

The allegations have been made by Singh in her complaint and have not been established by a court.

After submitting the complaint, Singh questioned the circumstances in which a 12-year-old child allegedly came to the protest site.

“Who brought a 12-year-old child to a protest?” she asked, arguing that a child of that age falls within the category of a “child in need of care and protection”.

Singh alleged that children were present during the demonstration despite the tense circumstances surrounding the protest.

She referred to the reported lathi-charge at the site and argued that the presence of minors in such an environment warranted investigation.

The complaint names CJP leaders Abhijeet Dipke and Saurav Das, along with other organisers, and seeks investigation into their alleged role in bringing or involving children in the demonstration.

POCSO, BNS provisions invoked

Singh has sought registration of a case under Sections 13, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act, as well as Section 153 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

According to the complaint, the circumstances surrounding the presence of children at the protest require scrutiny and investigation.

Singh has alleged that the organisers were responsible for involving minors in the demonstration.

The complaint does not establish that the named individuals committed the alleged offences.

It seeks police action and investigation into the allegations raised by the advocate.

The protest at Jantar Mantar on July 20 was organised over the alleged NEET paper leak and wider concerns regarding irregularities in the education system.

The presence of minors has now become a central issue in Singh’s complaint, with the advocate arguing that organisers should explain why children were present at a demonstration that subsequently witnessed confrontation between protesters and police.

Complaint refers to PM Modi’s response

Singh has also referred to a subsequent social media message by Prime Minister Narendra Modi concerning the alleged remarks made during the protest.

According to the complaint, Modi said he had forgiven the youth over the alleged remarks and that no legal action would be taken against them, keeping their future in mind.

Singh, however, alleged that CJP organisers subsequently posted a video demanding an apology from the Prime Minister over the alleged police lathi-charge on protesters, including 12-year-old girls.

The advocate questioned the circumstances in which children had allegedly been present at the demonstration and why minors were exposed to an event that turned tense.

Her complaint has linked the alleged presence of children at the protest with the subsequent dispute over police action and statements made during and after the demonstration.

Questions raised over protest funding

Alongside the allegations concerning minors, Singh also raised questions about the funding of CJP’s protests.

“Who is funding the protest, and where is the money coming from?” she asked.

She alleged that the movement was being supported by what she described as a “deep state”.

Singh also alleged the involvement of “brokers and anti-nationals” whom she claimed were working against the government.

These allegations form part of Singh’s broader complaint against the organisers.

The claims concerning funding and alleged external backing have likewise been made by the advocate and remain allegations requiring verification.

The complaint has brought together the questions of the alleged involvement of minors, the conduct of the July 20 protest and the wider organisation and funding of the demonstrations.