The Supreme Court of India ruled that pellet guns may be used in exceptional cases rather than imposing a blanket ban on the weapons.
This decision balances the operational needs of law enforcement with the fundamental right to peaceful protest and the physical safety of citizens. By rejecting a total ban, the court maintains a tool for police while establishing stricter legal thresholds for its deployment.
A bench led by the Chief Justice of India sought a formal response from the Union Government regarding the use of pellet guns during crowd-control operations. The court said it is examining the legality and safety of these weapons to ensure they are not used indiscriminately against demonstrators.
As part of the proceedings, the court directed the preservation of specific police records. These include duty logs, weapon registries, and ammunition logs related to the protest held at Jantar Mantar in Delhi on July 20, 2026 [1]. The court said it aims to determine if the deployment of such weapons during that specific event adhered to necessary protocols.
The court's focus on documentation is intended to create a transparent trail of accountability. By requiring the preservation of ammunition logs, the judiciary can verify exactly how many rounds were fired and under what circumstances the weapons were authorized.
The Union Government must now provide the requested response to the court's inquiries. The final guidelines resulting from this process will likely define the narrow parameters of what constitutes an "exceptional case" for the use of pellet guns in the future.
“pellet guns may be used only in exceptional cases rather than imposing a blanket ban”
This ruling establishes a judicial middle ground between total prohibition and unrestricted police discretion. By mandating the preservation of logs from the July 20, 2026 [1] Jantar Mantar protest, the Supreme Court is signaling that the 'exceptional' nature of weapon use will be judged based on empirical evidence and documented necessity, potentially increasing the legal risk for officers who misuse non-lethal weaponry.
