Critics have described the assignment as a “reward” while the complaint remains under inquiry. The Home Department order, however, says the charge is temporary and carries no additional pay, seniority or statutory powers of an Additional DCP.
BY PC Bureau
New Delhi, October 5: An ACP named by a woman journalist in a complaint alleging sexual harassment during an October 3 protest has been assigned the temporary current-duty charge of Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, prompting questions over the timing of the order while the complaint remains under inquiry.
Assistant Commissioner of Police Vivek Bhagat, a 2018-batch DANIPS officer, was posted as Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Connaught Place, in New Delhi district before Monday’s order. He is among 12 Selection Grade DANIPS officers given current-duty charges by the Delhi government’s Home Department.
The order, issued on Monday and signed by Deputy Secretary (Home) Ramesh Kumar, says the Lieutenant Governor has assigned the officers the current duty charge “with immediate effect, in the interest of Government work.”
The other officers named are Dr Vikas Sheokand, A. Venkatesh, Gursewak Singh, Renu Lata, Vidushi Kaushik, Manu Himanshu, Sakaria Mihir Pravinbhai, Garima Tiwari, Ashish Kumar, Manish Ladla and Rohit Gupta.
Shocking !!
Modi Govt promoted ACP Vivek Bhagat to Addl DCP. He was the one accused of molesting woman journalist.
What safety & dignity can women of this country expect from BJP ? https://t.co/xR5wzCOvGk
— Saurabh Bharadwaj (@Saurabh_MLAgk) October 5, 2026
However, the order makes clear that the arrangement is neither a regular promotion nor a full appointment as Additional DCP. Officers holding the current-duty charge are not authorised to exercise the statutory powers and duties of an Additional DCP.
The arrangement will continue until the Ministry of Home Affairs makes regular appointments to the posts. It carries no additional pay, allowances or seniority benefits, does not affect inter-se seniority and can be withdrawn at any time without assigning a reason.
Order comes two days after harassment complaint
The timing of Bhagat’s assignment has attracted scrutiny because his name figures in a complaint arising from the October 3 protest near Jantar Mantar and Kerala House against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
Police detained protesters after prohibitory restrictions under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita were imposed. Three women who identified themselves as journalists subsequently complained of alleged manhandling and sexual harassment by police personnel during the detention.
One of the complainants, described in reports as an independent journalist associated with a digital news outlet, specifically named Bhagat. She has alleged that she was recording the detention of AISA president Neha Bora when she questioned why no woman police officer was present. She subsequently alleged that she was touched inappropriately, struck on the chest and pushed.
Delhi Police has said the complaints were received, medical examinations were conducted and the matter was transferred to the Crime Branch for a “fair and impartial enquiry.”
As of Monday morning, published reports said no FIR had been registered against Bhagat. Police have also said that viral CCTV images circulated in connection with the allegations were AI-generated or manipulated and warned against sharing them.
READ: INDIA Bloc MPs to March to Election Commission on Tuesday
Routine exercise or awkward timing?
The central question now is whether Bhagat’s new assignment is simply a routine administrative exercise or whether its timing creates an appearance of preferential treatment while a complaint naming him is pending.
Some senior officers have described the current-duty assignments as part of a routine, time-bound process involving the Selection Grade DANIPS batch. They have said the proposal for the appointments was initiated before the October 3 protest and the subsequent complaint.
That explanation has not been independently confirmed from the Home Department file.
Critics, including the Cockroach Janata Party, have nevertheless questioned whether an officer named in a sexual-harassment complaint should receive a higher current-duty assignment while the allegations are still being examined. Opposition leaders had earlier criticised the police for not registering an FIR in connection with the complaints.
For now, the controversy rests on a striking sequence of events: a police officer named in a sexual-harassment complaint receives a temporary higher-duty charge just two days after the incident, even as the complaint against him remains under investigation.
