Supreme Court: No blanket ban on use of pellet guns for crowd control

File photo: Pellet gun use during jantar mantar protest

NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday directed Delhi government to provide treatment to those injured during students’ protests but found a plea for ban on use of pellet guns for crowd control vague and asked when police are permitted to fire bullets in extreme situations, how could pellet guns be banned.Appearing for petitioners, advocate Vrinda Grover questioned the legality of Rapid Action Force using pellet guns against student protesters on July 20 at Jantar Mantar, and urged the SC to direct the Union govt to preserve the ammunition log of RAF during their deployment at the protest site and award exemplary compensation to those injured by metallic pellets.The petition was filed by Sheikh Irshad Mansoori and Prashant Kumar Singh, who suffered injuries from pellet guns on July 20, and former IPS officer Yashovardhan Azad.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana directed preservation of the logbook, and solicitor general Tushar Mehta said all documents required for an effective investigation into alleged police excesses and violence at the protest site would be preserved.

Both protesters and police human beings: Supreme Court

When Grover persisted with the plea for a ban on use of pellet guns, Justice Bagchi termed the prayer vague and said, “Police regulations permit use of pellet guns in exceptional circumstances. If you want phasing out of pellet guns, then you must challenge those regulations, which you have not done.“You say at no stage metallic pellet can be used, when graded response permits use of bullets in extreme situations. Seeking ban on use of pellet guns cannot be on the same plane as seeking a ban on use of bullets (for crowd dispersal)? Law permits use of bullets.”Justice Bagchi recalled a Calcutta High Court order quashing a colonial-era police regulation asking personnel to fire at chests instead of legs of protesters to save ammunition.The bench said Azad needed to amend the relief sought in his petition as there could be an SOP for police’s graded action delineating when to use rubber pellets followed by metallic pellets. Grover agreed to amend the prayer to enable the SC to provide guidelines for the police’s crowd dispersal action.The bench reiterated that there were occasions when peaceful protests were hijacked by miscreants and became vehicles for ulterior purposes, including for the purpose of sabotaging the bona fide aim of the protests.“All such situations would require various graded responses. But most important is to equip police with adequate safety gear. Only then can they ponder over graded responses to violent crowds. Otherwise, the protesters and police, both are human beings and react equally to threats coming to them,” the bench said. The SG said citizens always have a right to non-violent protest.Grover said updated guidelines framed by Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD) were not available after 2016 and it was very difficult to obtain information from police. The bench said this was not correct and such guidelines should be uploaded on websites. The SG said he would check the veracity of Azad’s allegation.The SC had said on July 28 that it was prima facie convinced about a high-level inquiry into alleged police excesses and violence against cops and directed police to preserve data collected from various cameras but restrained them from taking coercive action against students and making public their personal data.

Grover said petitioners Mansoori and Singh were injured by metallic pellets fired by RAF without provocation. She said while Mansoori received good treatment at Lady Hardinge Hospital, Singh did not, leading the SC to direct Delhi govt to provide adequate treatment to the two and all those injured during the protests led by CJP.