TMC MP Mahua Moitra demanded a statement from Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday regarding the use of pellet guns against student protestors [1].
The demand centers on government accountability for police tactics used during public demonstrations. If the Home Minister provides a formal statement, it could establish the chain of command and the legal justification for using such munitions in a civilian area.
Speaking in the Lok Sabha on 12 August 2026 [1], Moitra questioned who authorized the police action that occurred on 20 July 2026 [2]. The incident took place at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi [1].
"Amit Shah has been running away from the Parliament," Moitra said. "We are demanding a statement from him on who ordered the use of pellet guns on protestors at Jantar Mantar" [1].
The Trinamool Congress lawmaker sought clarity on the specific orders given to security forces during the July crackdown [2]. The use of pellet guns, weapons that fire small metal spheres, has historically been a point of contention regarding human rights and policing standards in India.
Government representatives have pushed back against the accusation that the Home Minister is avoiding the legislature. Kiren Rijiju said that the opposition should not run away and that Amit Shah is ready to debate [3].
The clash occurs during the Parliament's monsoon session, where multiple issues including the FCRA amendment bill and delimitation reports are also under discussion [2]. Moitra's demand highlights a growing friction between the opposition and the Home Ministry over the handling of student-led protests in the capital.
“"We are demanding a statement from him on who ordered the use of pellet guns on protestors at Jantar Mantar."”
This confrontation reflects a broader struggle over the transparency of internal security operations in New Delhi. By demanding a specific name or order for the use of pellet guns, the opposition is attempting to shift the narrative from the legality of the protest to the proportionality of the state's response. The government's insistence that the Home Minister is 'ready to debate' suggests a strategy of addressing the issue through general parliamentary discourse rather than providing a targeted admission of command responsibility.
