Supreme Court Takes Strict Stance on Pellet Guns, Seeks Government Response

Supreme Court Demands Detailed Protocol for Pellet Gun Use

The Supreme Court has adopted a stern approach towards the alleged use of pellet guns during protests against the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) paper leak. Taking the matter seriously, the apex court has issued a notice to the Central government, seeking comprehensive details regarding the use of pellet guns and the established protocols for their deployment.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, and including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, expressed concerns during the hearing. The court stated that if allegations of excessive force are being made, the solution lies not solely in a ban, but in establishing clear, accountable, and humane protocols for their use.

Detailed Protocol Sought for Pellet Gun Usage

The Supreme Court has asked the Central government to clarify the circumstances under which pellet guns are used, the existing standard operating procedures (SOPs), and the clear protocol for their deployment. The court emphasized that while security forces may require necessary tools for maintaining law and order, a transparent and accountable system for their use is equally crucial.

The petitioner had initially sought a complete ban on the use of pellet guns. However, the court suggested amending the petition to focus on demanding clear guidelines and standard procedures for pellet gun usage, rather than solely advocating for a ban.

Order to Preserve Records of Security Forces

The Supreme Court has directed the Central government to secure complete records of weapons, ammunition, and personnel on duty during the Rapid Action Force (RAF) deployment at the Jantar Mantar protest. The court deemed these records essential for a fair investigation and verification of facts in the case.

The court has also issued instructions to hospital administration to ensure proper and best medical treatment for a protester injured by a pellet gun, stressing that all necessary medical facilities should be provided to the injured individual.

The Central government is expected to file a detailed response in this regard during the next hearing. The Supreme Court's stance highlights the importance of defining the limits of force during crowd control, protecting human rights, and establishing accountability among security forces.