Why should the use of pellet guns not be considered arbitrary? Strict question from the Supreme Court, CJI Surya Kant asked – What is the SOP of the security forces? Why shouldn’t the use of pellet guns be considered arbitrary? The Supreme Court posed a stern question; CJI Surya Kant asked—what is the security forces’ SOP

Pellet guns, used to maintain law and order in sensitive areas and during protests, have once again come under the radar of the country’s Supreme Court. During the hearing of a very important case, the Supreme Court has raised very tough and serious questions regarding the use of pellet guns. A bench headed by Chief Justice (CJI) Surya Kant directly asked the petitioner’s counsel and the government side as to why the action of pellet guns should not be considered arbitrary and uncontrolled.

Court’s strict stance on guidelines and SOP of security forces

During the hearing in the courtroom, CJI Surya Kant laid special emphasis on what is the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) adopted by the security forces to control the crowd. Expressing concern, the court asked whether all the prescribed rules and safety standards are completely followed before using pellet guns? The bench made it clear that it is important to strike a right balance between the safety of citizens and law and order, and in no circumstances should the use of force exceed the limits laid down.

All eyes were on the arguments of the petitioner and the government.

In this sensitive case, the petitioner’s lawyer argued before the court that indiscriminate use of pellet guns often causes serious physical harm to innocent people and protesters, in which many people even lose their eyesight. The lawyer called it a direct violation of human rights and right to life. On the other hand, the government machinery and security agencies have always argued that pellet guns, as non-lethal weapons, are used as a last resort to deal with stone pelting and violent mobs, in self-defense and to maintain the rule of law.

What will be the impact of this strict stance of the court on states and sensitive areas?

After the Supreme Court demanded SOP and called it ‘arbitrary’, there is now a huge pressure on the police of various states of the country and central security forces (like CRPF) to review their containment strategies. Especially in Jammu and Kashmir and other disturbed or protest areas, where pellet guns have been used extensively in the past, major changes may be seen in the local law and order and security policies there. Legal and human rights experts across the country are keeping an eye on what guidelines the court issues in this case in the coming days.