Investigation into pellet gun use during Delhi student protests

3 entries over 18 days, from 5 August 2026 to 22 August 2026.

01
5 August

Pellet injuries from Parliament protest march

Protesters sustained pellet injuries during a July 20 protest march to Parliament.
Medical protocol involves removing pellets only if they pose a high risk, are near vital organs, or cause significant pain.
Some pellets remain permanently lodged in patients' bodies, with medical advice suggesting they will be encapsulated by muscle tissue.
Victims are advised to undergo periodic X-rays and medical monitoring.
Retained pellets are treated as evidence in medico-legal cases and handed over to police in sealed containers.

02
11 August

RTI responses from Lady Hardinge Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital confirm at least 10 individuals sustained pellet injuries during a protest march in New Delhi on July 20.
Lady Hardinge Medical College reported nine pellet injury cases; Safdarjung Hospital reported one.
Delhi Police initially denied the use of pellet guns, but a subsequent general diary entry at Parliament Street police station confirmed the Rapid Action Force (RAF) fired two rounds from an anti-riot gun.
Medical records for other injured individuals indicate injuries from 'blunt weapons'.
Data from other major hospitals, including AIIMS and Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, is currently pending.
The incident highlights discrepancies between official initial denials and subsequent documentation regarding the use of non-lethal force in crowd control.

03
22 August

A 19-year-old student sustained severe eye injuries from pellet guns during a protest on July 20.
The FIR was registered under Sections 118(1) and 125 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Initial police reports denied the use of pellet guns, but general diary entries from the Sansad Marg police station confirmed their deployment by the Rapid Action Force (RAF).
The Supreme Court has constituted a five-member High-Powered Enquiry Committee to investigate the use of force, including pellet guns, lathis, tear gas, and electric batons, during the protest.
Concerns have been raised regarding crowd-control protocols and the accountability of law enforcement agencies in handling student demonstrations.
The incident highlights the challenges citizens face in registering FIRs for police-related grievances and the role of oversight mechanisms in ensuring institutional accountability.

Newest first. A story that ran for 18 days is exactly the kind the mains paper asks about as one question.

Examine the legal and ethical implications of using non-lethal crowd-control measures like pellet guns during civil protests. How can the state balance the maintenance of public order with the protection of fundamental rights? 150 words · 22 August
The registration of an FIR is a mandatory first step in the criminal justice process. Discuss the challenges citizens face in accessing this right and evaluate the role of judicial oversight in ensuring police accountability and the rule of law in India. 250 words · 22 August
Critically examine the challenges associated with the use of 'non-lethal' weapons in crowd control and the necessity for standardized protocols to ensure human rights compliance in internal security operations. 150 words · 11 August
Discuss the ethical and human rights implications of using non-lethal crowd control measures in democratic protests. To what extent should the state balance the necessity of maintaining public order with the protection of individual bodily integrity? 150 words · 5 August

250words.in · https://250words.in/stories/investigation-into-pellet-gun-use-during-delhi-student