Amid recent rape incidents, Supreme Court orders enhanced Delhi patrolling and verification of public-transport drivers

The Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of recent rape incidents in Delhi NCR and had, by an earlier order dated 28.09.2026, sought status reports and directed interim measures including enhanced patrolling, vulnerability mapping, lighting and CCTV audits, and infrastructure repairs

At the hearing on 05.10.2026, the Amicus highlighted existing Delhi Police measures, including Shishtachar Squads and the Standing Order on sexual offences in public, while raising concerns about police staffing, fragmented grievance portals and the need for effective patrol monitoring

The Union and Delhi authorities reported that joint deliberations on compliance were underway

The Court considered whether existing preventive-policing arrangements were functioning effectively and what further measures and reporting were needed

1. Whether existing police and administrative mechanisms for crime prevention and emergency response are being effectively implemented, and whether any policy or implementation gaps require attention

2. Whether further measures are required to improve preventive policing, public-safety infrastructure, emergency response and citizen participation in Delhi NCR

3. Whether implementation of preventive-policing measures is subject to adequate accountability and safeguards against arbitrary or disproportionate police action

The Court invoked the Broken Windows theory, under which visible, unaddressed disorder may foster perceptions of neglect and insecurity and contribute to further disorder

It treated crime prevention as requiring more than post-offence detection and prosecution: visible patrolling, surveillance, prompt attention to reported deficiencies, real-time coordination and citizen participation are also relevant

The Court referred to the existing Delhi Police Standing Order No. L&O/25/2024, Circular No. 15/2025 on Shishtachar Squads, and applicable police rules and protocols as frameworks whose implementation required assessment

It also referred to the directions concerning Vehicle Tracking System Devices in S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India

Preventive policing must remain within the bounds of legality, proportionality and accountability

The Court considered that unattended defects in lighting, CCTV coverage, patrolling and complaint response could signal diminished vigilance and undermine public confidence; accordingly, prevention required timely intervention before such vulnerabilities contributed to crime

Because the Amicus identified existing mechanisms but questioned their practical effectiveness, the Court focused on verifiable implementation rather than creating another layer of protocols.

It required evidence of Shishtachar Squad activity, Operation “Nirbheek” and the “Nazuk” Scheme, and an assessment of squad training

It also directed measures addressing patrolling, transport-worker verification, SOS response, obstructive vehicle parking and unlawful liquor establishments, while requiring safeguards against excessive police action

The Court required consolidated, accountable reporting by senior officials to assess compliance and outstanding gaps

It ordered enhanced patrolling, verification and identification requirements for public-transport drivers and assistants, review of vehicle-tracking and SOS-response mechanisms, removal of specified obstructions, and action against unauthorised liquor establishments

It required reports on control-room coordination, citizen engagement, Shishtachar Squad operations, the “Nirbheek” and “Nazuk” schemes, and specialised training

Consolidated status reports and affidavits were directed within four weeks and no later than 06.11.2026, with specified responsibility assigned to the Chief Secretary and Commissioner of Police; the matter was listed for 16.11.2026.