Rapid Action Force Bans Pellet Guns Following Jantar Mantar Protest Crackdown

DNI SUMMARY — KEY POINTS

• The Rapid Action Force has officially prohibited the use of projectile attack guns and electric shock weapons during all ongoing deployments in Delhi following a critical internal review.
• Inspector General Seema Dhundia chaired a high-level review meeting where she expressed serious dissatisfaction regarding the disproportionate use of force during the July 20 student demonstrations.
• Multiple social media videos circulating online showed security personnel deliberately knocking down protesters and assaulting individuals who were already retreating from the main protest site at Jantar Mantar.
• At least two individuals are currently receiving hospital treatment for serious injuries, including a student who reportedly risks permanent vision loss in one eye due to alleged pellet fire.
• The force has mandated the use of body-worn cameras for all personnel and initiated a verification process to ensure future crowd management aligns with strict legal protocols.

The Rapid Action Force has instituted immediate and sweeping restrictions on its crowd-control arsenal following an internal audit that revealed grave operational failures during the July 20 protests at Jantar Mantar. Amid mounting public outcry and viral documentation of the events, the elite anti-riot wing of the CRPF has officially banned the deployment of projectile attack guns, anti-riot guns, and electric shock devices throughout the national capital. This decisive shift in policy is a direct response to the scrutiny faced by the force following the tumultuous Sansad Chalo march earlier this month.

Operational Failures and Review

Operational Failures and Review

During a high-level virtual conference, Inspector General Seema Dhundia sternly reprimanded field commanders for the excessive force displayed by boots on the ground during the demonstration. The internal review highlighted that the conduct of personnel—many of whom were captured on video pushing individuals and striking protesters who had already been separated from the main group—clearly violated established standard operating procedures. The leadership emphasized that all future operations must rely on graded force and strict adherence to professional conduct rather than the disproportionate aggression witnessed during the mid-July clashes.

Enhanced Accountability Measures

The ramifications of these operational lapses are increasingly visible in local hospitals, where victims of the protest are battling severe physical consequences. Among those affected is Sahil Lochab, a university student whose family claims he suffered a direct pellet injury that has left him facing the potential permanent loss of sight in his right eye. Such injuries have ignited a broader debate regarding the classification of these weapons, which security forces traditionally label as non-lethal, yet carry profound and often life-altering risks when used against civilian crowds at close range.

Enhanced Accountability Measures

Legal Challenges Mounting

To curb future misconduct, the RAF headquarters has mandated that all personnel deployed in Delhi must now wear functional body-worn cameras during every operational engagement. This move is designed to provide transparent, verifiable records of force usage and to hold individual commanders personally responsible for the behavior of the troops under their immediate supervision. By integrating these visual safeguards, the force aims to restore its tarnished reputation and ensure that the chaotic scenes of violence witnessed at Jantar Mantar remain a singular, unfortunate anomaly in their history.

The verification process currently underway involves a meticulous analysis of numerous video clips that show security personnel engaged in physical confrontations with protesters. While authorities have previously denied the use of pellet ammunition, the ongoing internal inquiry seeks to reconcile these denials with photographic evidence and medical reports emerging from the incident. The Central Reserve Police Force remains under significant pressure as they attempt to balance the need for maintaining law and order with the constitutional rights of the citizens participating in the democratic process.

Future Operational Directives

Legal Challenges Mounting

Legal scrutiny is compounding the pressure on the government, with the Delhi High Court actively seeking responses from official agencies regarding petitions filed against the use of excessive force. The ongoing hearings represent a critical legal hurdle for state officials, who must now defend their crowd management strategies under the watchful eyes of the judiciary. If the ongoing verification exercise determines that excessive force was indeed authorized or utilized without sufficient cause, it could lead to further punitive actions against the officers involved in the Jantar Mantar deployment.

Beyond the immediate tactical restrictions, the incident has sparked a nationwide conversation regarding the appropriate armaments provided to internal security forces. Critics argue that the reliance on pellet guns and electric shock batons reflects an outdated approach to crowd management that prioritizes immobilization over de-escalation. As the RAF attempts to recalibrate its tactics and instill greater discipline, the reliance on body cameras and the prohibition of specific weapons serve as a tentative step toward more sensitive and accountable policing practices in the nation’s capital.

Future Operational Directives

Commandants have been instructed to ensure that all future briefings emphasize the necessity of proportionate response and the human rights of protesters. By tightening the grip on field operations and enforcing rigorous training requirements, the CRPF hopes to prevent a recurrence of the Jantar Mantar events. The future of protest management in India remains a central point of contention, yet these current reforms indicate a rare, albeit reactive, admission that the previous standards of force were entirely unacceptable and necessitate immediate, fundamental structural change.