Enshrouded and unwilling to meet any person who comes at her door stead, the mother of two of the accused in the stone-pelting incident indicates from behind that nobody was home.
The situation remains tense, with all roads leading into and out of the DDA Flats blocked off. Residents now navigate the area only through the narrow nooks and crannies of the compound’s alleys.
Earlier in the day on January 8, 2026, Delhi Police personnel entered the premises and took away her sons, Adil and Hamza. With the burden of proof hanging over their heads, the pressure is beginning to weigh on the family.
While both brothers remain in jail, the household is now largely being managed by their mother. Their nearly 10-year-old younger brother waits to leave for his next tuition class.
Speaking in hushed tones from behind the door, the woman said she was unaware of the allegations levelled against her sons. Inside the tenements of Turkman Gate’s DDA Flats, the home stood in complete stillness. Not a sound could be heard. “I have no clue as to what happened. The cops just came in and took them away,” she said.
According to neighbours, both men were present at the site of unrest earlier, before the stone-pelting began.
What happened at Turkman Gate
On January 6, 2026, a midnight operation echoed through the narrow lanes of Old Delhi. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) carried out a large-scale demolition drive at Turkman Gate.
Acting on an order of the Delhi High Court to reclaim around 36,000 square feet of public land, a fleet of 32 bulldozers moved in shortly after midnight. Structures built on encroached land near Ramlila Maidan were razed.
Among the demolished structures were a community banquet hall, a local dispensary and several boundary walls. The historic Faiz-e-Elahi Mosque was explicitly excluded from the demolition order and remained untouched.
However, the presence of heavy machinery in the dead of night triggered panic. Rumours quickly spread across the neighbourhood.
The situation escalated around 12:40 am as nearly 150 residents gathered to protest. Despite earlier peace meetings held by the Aman Committee, tensions rose when protesters allegedly breached police barricades and pelted stones at security personnel.
Police responded by firing tear gas shells and conducting a lathi charge to regain control of the area.
At least five police personnel, including the Station House Officer of Chandni Mahal, were injured and required hospitalisation. By morning, the neighbourhood was placed under heavy security.
Nearly 800 personnel from the Delhi Police and the Rapid Action Force were deployed. The historic gateway was effectively turned into a fortified zone.
In the aftermath, 20 people have been arrested under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on charges of rioting and obstructing public servants. Section 163 of the BNSS remained in force in the area for days.
Local markets were shut, and movement was restricted. Nearly 300 truckloads were required to clear the debris left behind.
The episode has also reopened old wounds. Several residents drew parallels to the 1976 Turkman Gate demolitions. They said that despite legal sanction, the timing and manner of the drive left the local community deeply shaken.
‘They did not even wait for them to speak’
Mohammed Ali (name changed), a neighbour of Adil and Hamza, alleged that both were taken into custody without due procedure.
“The police came and did not even wait for them to speak. They took them into custody. They are just around 18 years of age, and when the incident unfolded, they had already returned home,” he said.
He added that the brothers were at the spot earlier in the morning, when the situation had not escalated.
Ali claimed the two were caught up in the situation because of the influence of a local strongman. “They had just gotten in with some worse-for-wear company. That is what unfolded,” he said.
He added that the brothers were aware of the risks. “Being from a household run only by their mother, even Hamza and Adil know they cannot risk their necks,” he said.
Similar allegations have emerged from other households in the area.
Shahnawaz, a nearly 50-year-old resident of Turkman Gate’s main market, was also taken away from his home in the early hours.
According to family members, no copy of the FIR was provided. “They entered in the morning without any warrant, either for entry or arrest, and took him away,” said Razia, 72, Shahnawaz’s mother.
She said the family tried to seek answers. “We tried to ask the police what they were doing, but they did not answer any of our queries,” she said.
Shahnawaz’s son Armaan Ali, 25, said the family tried to keep protests to a minimum. “We were scared of being hauled away or manhandled ourselves,” he said.
He added that the situation was particularly frightening because his grandmother was “old and frail”.
Ali said the incident unfolded when his uncle stepped out to dispose of garbage. “The garbage man had not come today (January 8), so my uncle went to the compactor nearby,” he said.
“While returning, the police followed him inside the house. They stormed in and entered the bedroom without any warrant,” he said.
Ali said the police woke his father and took him away. “They refused to answer our questions,” he said.
The accused have been booked under Sections 221 (obstructing a public servant), 132 (assault to deter a public servant), 121 (causing hurt to deter a public servant), 191(2) (rioting), 191(3) (rioting with deadly weapons), 223(a) (disobedience of a public order) and 3(5) (common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
They have also been booked under Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
Case reaches court
On January 9, the Tis Hazari Court remanded eight men — Imran Farrukh, Imran Sultan, Mohd Affan, Amir Hamza, Mohd Ubaid Ullah, Shahnawaz, Mohd Athar and Mohd Adil — to judicial custody until January 21.
The remand is in connection with the Turkman Gate stone-pelting case.
Judicial Magistrate Sayesha Chaddha granted the custody after the Delhi Police produced CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts. Police also seized mobile phones that allegedly contained instigating messages and videos.
Investigators added Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (attempt to murder). They stated that six officers, including the local SHO, sustained serious head and facial injuries.
While the prosecution argued that the accused were clearly identified at the scene, defence counsel contested the arrests. They cited lack of evidence and procedural lapses, including the absence of arrest notices.
The court has sought a medical report from jail authorities. This followed allegations that five other suspects detained earlier were subjected to torture.
One accused, Mohd Athar, was allowed to continue medication for TB and asthma while in custody.
Presently, further investigations into the incident are ongoing, with the police targetting social media influencers, as well.
