Photo: Social media video
A video appears to show Delhi’s PWD Minister slapping a man during a road inspection in Tilak Nagar. The man has complained to police. The minister says the video leaves out what happened before it. And the question that started it all, whether the road was built properly, is still unanswered.
The Road Inspection That Turned Confrontational
On Sunday, September 27, Delhi’s Public Works Department (PWD) Minister Parvesh Verma went to inspect a newly laid road in the Tilak Nagar area of west Delhi. The road is part of the Vikaspuri Ring Road.
The local MLA, Jarnail Singh of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), was also there. He had complained about the road, and he questioned its quality in front of the minister.
The argument got heated. Then, as a man named Saheb Singh recorded the scene on his phone, a physical confrontation broke out between him and the minister.
A video of that moment spread quickly on social media. Within hours, a road inspection had become one of the biggest political fights in Delhi.
What the Video Shows
The video that has been widely shared appears to show the following:
- Saheb Singh is recording the minister on his phone.
- Parvesh Verma comes toward him.
- The phone appears to be pushed down.
- There is a short physical struggle.
- Verma appears to slap Saheb Singh.
- Security staff and others step in and separate them.
It is just as important to say what the video does not show. It does not show what happened in the moments before the recording. It does not show what was said off camera. And it does not prove the wider claims that either side is now making.
A video can show that a confrontation happened. It cannot, by itself, tell us why.
Why the Road Became the Flashpoint
The fight started over the road.
The AAP side says the newly laid road was of poor quality. According to AAP’s Delhi president Saurabh Bharadwaj, Jarnail Singh and local residents pulled pieces of road material off the surface by hand to show how weak it was, according to PTI.
Verma’s side rejects this. He says the road is good, that it had been waiting to be built for years, and that the complaints are politically motivated.
Why does road quality matter so much? Because a PWD inspection is meant to check exactly that: whether public money was spent properly and whether the work meets the required standard.
But here is the key point: no official test or technical report has yet said whether this road is good or bad. Pulling bits off a road surface on camera is not an engineering test. Until one is done, “poor quality” and “good quality” are both claims.
Saheb Singh’s Account
Saheb Singh says he is an associate of MLA Jarnail Singh and handles the MLA’s social media work.
He says he was only recording. “I was recording a video of the inspection when Parvesh Verma snatched my phone and raised his hand at me, which is clearly visible in the video,” he said, according to PTI. “His security personnel held my hand and grabbed me by the neck, and pulled me away.”
He has filed a complaint against the minister with the police.
Parvesh Verma’s Response
Verma responded in a video statement posted on X on Sunday.
He said the clip AAP was sharing had been presented without context, according to PTI. He said it was Jarnail Singh who had complained about the road, and that he had invited the MLA to come and see the work for himself. “MLA Jarnail Singh had complained of poor road construction work, and when I visited the spot, I requested the AAP MLA to also come there,” Verma said.
He then made serious allegations of his own:
- Verma alleged that Jarnail Singh had been demanding a commission from the road contractor.
- Verma alleged that the MLA’s side would come after the road was laid at night, dig parts of it up, and film it to claim corruption.
- Verma alleged that Saheb Singh had abused his family before the confrontation.
- Verma said a PWD engineer had filed a police complaint against the AAP side, and that an FIR was being registered.
These are Verma’s allegations. None of them has been proven, and the police have not confirmed the FIR he mentioned.
What Delhi Police Says
So far, the police have said very little, and that itself matters.
According to police, Saheb Singh has filed a complaint against the minister at Vikaspuri Police Station. Police sources said the facts in the complaint are being verified.
What the police have not said, at the time of writing:
- They have not confirmed registering an FIR against Parvesh Verma.
- They have not confirmed Verma’s claim that an FIR is being registered against the AAP side.
- They have not said whether they have collected other video or CCTV footage.
So the honest position is this: one complaint is confirmed, and it is being checked. Anything beyond that is not yet on the official record.
Political Reactions
The political reaction came fast, and it has mostly come from AAP. All of the following are claims made by political leaders, not findings.
AAP:
- Jarnail Singh, the Tilak Nagar MLA, shared the video on X. He said the minister had come to inspect the road, “but seeing the scams being exposed, he lost his temper” and started a scuffle with his colleague.
- Arvind Kejriwal, AAP chief and former Delhi Chief Minister, demanded Verma’s arrest in a post on X, and said he would visit Tilak Nagar himself to inspect the road.
- Atishi, Leader of the Opposition in the Delhi Assembly, alleged that public money had been spent on a “poor quality” road and demanded the minister’s immediate arrest, according to PTI.
- Saurabh Bharadwaj, AAP’s Delhi president, alleged the minister had no answer when the road’s quality was shown to him, and left the spot after the incident.
- AAP MLA Kuldeep Kumar accused Verma of “acting like a goon rather than a minister.”
BJP:
- The BJP’s response so far has come mainly from Verma himself, whose allegations against Jarnail Singh and Saheb Singh are set out above. He has also said AAP is upset because work left pending during its years in power is now being done.
The Road Question Is Still Unanswered
This story is really two separate questions that have got mixed up.
Question 1: What happened in the confrontation?
This can be answered with:
- the video, and any longer or other versions of it
- statements from people who were there
- the police complaint and any investigation
- CCTV footage from the area, if it exists
Question 2: Is the road built properly?
This needs completely different evidence:
- PWD work records
- the contract and its required standards
- quality-control reports
- an engineering inspection
- laboratory tests of the road material
The first question is about how a minister behaved. The second is about how public money was spent. Both matter. But answering one does not answer the other.
A viral video can show that a confrontation happened. It cannot, by itself, show whether the road work was faulty, or whether anyone asked for a bribe.
Right now, both sides are using the video to argue about the road, and using the road to argue about the video. The evidence for each has to be looked at separately.
What Happens Next?
Things to watch in the coming days:
- The police: whether Saheb Singh’s complaint leads to an FIR, and what the verification finds.
- Verma’s claim: whether police confirm any complaint or FIR against the AAP side, as he says.
- The road: whether the PWD or an independent body tests the road and publishes the results.
- More video: whether longer footage or CCTV shows what happened before the clip.
- Kejriwal’s visit: his planned inspection of the road in Tilak Nagar.
- Proof of the bribery claim: whether Verma or the PWD produces any evidence that the MLA demanded a commission.
Conclusion
A road inspection has turned into a political fight, but underneath the noise there are two plain questions.
First: what exactly happened between the minister and the man recording him? That is for the police and the evidence to decide.
Second: was the road built to the required standard? That needs engineers, test results and official records, not viral clips.
Until that evidence comes out, what each side is saying, from “corruption” to “commission,” should be treated as what it is: a claim, not a fact.
By The Lion Capital Editorial Team | September 2026