Delhi: the police facial-recognition system logged at least 25 people who were in Tihar, Mandoli or Rohini jails as present at the Jantar Mantar student protests (20 to 26 July 2026), with timestamps on 24 to 26 July, on a sworn list of 2,873 persons with 'criminal antecedents' that the Supreme Court allowed police to register a fresh FIR against (Indian Express investigation, 4 September 2026)

The Indian Express (4 September 2026) reported that when the Supreme Court quashed all FIRs relating to the exam-leak protests by students on 1 September, it let the government proceed against the 2,873 people whom Delhi Police claimed had criminal records and had been identified by its facial-recognition software at the main protest site at Jantar Mantar between 20 and 26 July, the police having said that any action would follow field verification. Of the 2,873 people in the police affidavit, the newspaper focused on the 205 accused of murder (101), rape (61), offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (six) and 37 of the 62 listed under attempt to murder, and found from police, jail and court records that at least 25 of them were in jail when the FRS flagged them: 17 facing murder charges, four rape charges (the narrative says two POCSO cases, the itemised list marks three) and four attempted murder, lodged in the Tihar, Mandoli and Rohini prison complexes. The newspaper lists each with the FRS timestamp (three on 24 July, twenty-one on 25 July, one on 26 July) and the custody dates, which in some cases go back years; at least one is an accused in a high-profile Delhi murder. Responding on 31 August to the newspaper's questionnaire, Delhi Police said the 2,873 had been spotted as prima facie having criminal antecedents and that further verification was pending. The affidavit, submitted on 17 August in response to petitions alleging excessive force and surveillance at the protest, said the FRS identified people whose particulars matched official police databases, 2,402 through the 'Crime Kundli' biometric database and 471 through criminal records; it does not say whether those identified were accused, convicted or merely named in cases, states that only people facing serious offences are held in police face records, and says that no action is taken solely on the FRS result, which is the first step before field verification. The newspaper recalled the police's 2022 reply to a Right to Information request that it treats an 80 per cent accuracy rate as a positive match, and noted that the result is not by itself proof of identity (Outlook adds that a match does not prove presence at the protest). Outlook India relayed the findings the same day. The Internet Freedom Foundation, whose 2022 RTI replies disclosed the 80 per cent threshold, published an analysis calling the field-verification process itself the harm (police visits to homes and workplaces communicating to family, landlords and employers that a person is on a protest-linked list) and demanding withdrawal of the list, disclosure to each listed person and a moratorium on facial recognition at assemblies. The Federal noted that the Court had on 18 August constituted a five-member High-Powered Enquiry Committee headed by Justice R Subhash Reddy whose terms include surveillance, that a petition by MP A A Rahim challenging the use of facial recognition at the protest is pending, and that the Court's order made no finding that the 2,873 were present or had qualifying records, and that the permitted FIR is 'with respect to' the listed persons rather than an instruction to arrest them.

At least 25 people in judicial custody were recorded by the police facial-recognition system as present at a protest they could not have attended and were placed, in a sworn affidavit before the Supreme Court, on a list of 2,873 persons with criminal antecedents against whom the Court permitted a fresh FIR and police field verification; The Indian Express reports the misidentifications and the Internet Freedom Foundation describes the exposure to verification visits and prosecution as the harm. No arrest, FIR entry or verification visit of any of the 25 is reported in the inspected sources.

Supreme Court order of 1 September 2026 (a Bench headed by the Chief Justice, invoking Article 142) quashed the FIRs against students and permitted Delhi Police to register a fresh, specific FIR concerning the 2,873 persons with alleged serious antecedents, directing that this should not prejudice their rights (IFF). The Federal notes the order prescribed no method or express requirement that verification precede arrest or other action; the field-verification undertaking is the police's own. Delhi Police's affidavit of 17 August 2026 states that no action is taken solely on an FRS result and that field verification is done for each recognised face. Responding to The Indian Express on 31 August, the police said the 2,873 had been spotted as prima facie having criminal antecedents and that further verification was pending; the response did not address the 25 cases. The Internet Freedom Foundation, which sent a legal representation to the Commissioner of Police on 24 July 2026 and filed RTI applications, has called for the list to be withdrawn and the findings placed before the Court. No later action is reported in the inspected sources.