New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Delhi government to ensure medical care for protestors injured by pellet guns at Jantar Mantar, while also telling the petitioner to focus his challenge on the rules that permit such weapons.
The direction came on a plea moved by former Intelligence Bureau special director Yashovardhan Azad against the use of pellet guns by police.
The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said, “Government of Delhi shall provide medical treatment to the injured petitioner or other similarly placed individuals,” while hearing the matter.
Azad, who has also served as Central Information Commissioner under the Right to Information Act, argued that RAF personnel used pellet guns against protestors at Jantar Mantar. “The injury caused to civilians by pellets fired by RAF personnel who were peacefully gathered for the Sansad Chalo march further entitles them to the public law remedy of compensation,” the plea submitted.
The petition sought a ban on the use of wholly or partly metallic kinetic projectiles, or pellets, fired from pump action rifles or projectile action guns for crowd dispersal by law enforcement agencies. It also said victims of pellet injuries should be adequately compensated and given medical treatment, as reported by Bar and Bench.
Use Allowed In Exceptional Cases
The bench, however, pointed out that police rules permit the use of pellet guns in exceptional situations, and said such use cannot be treated as illegal unless the rules themselves are challenged. “Police rules allows the use in exceptional circumstances unless you challenge the rules itself. One of the steps of graded approach is use of pellet guns,” Justice Bagchi said.
Chief Justice Surya Kant added that the petition should instead seek a protocol governing such weapons. “In light of alleged excessive use, your prayer should be that court lays down a protocol regarding the use,” the CJI observed.
He also referred to an old rule from Calcutta that required bullets to be fired at the chest to conserve ammunition, saying that provision had later been struck down. “In Calcutta, there was a rule that bullets should be fired at the chest to preserve ammunition and not any other body area. that rule was struck down. So you have to show us rules where use of pellets is arbitrary, etc,” the Court said to the petitioner.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Vrinda Grover said there was no standing order of the Delhi Police mandating pellet use. “If that is there, let it be placed. I am sure Union or NCT does not want to fire pellets at students,” Grover said.
Peaceful Protests Supported
Justice Bagchi then said the court was not against peaceful demonstrations, but warned against attempts to hijack protests for other motives. “We are agreeable to non-violent approach when protest by students etc and that personal hijacking of protest cannot be allowed which sabotages the bona fide of the protest for their ulterior motives. Arm your police in such a way that they don’t have to revert to such actions,” he remarked.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, responded: “They had protective gear… But yes I agree,”
At the end of the hearing, the court asked Azad to amend the plea and specifically challenge the rules that allow pellet guns to be used.
