Delhi Police authorised pellet gun use against protestors on July 20: RAF general diary entry

Delhi Police authorised pellet gun employ against protestors on July 20: RAF general diary entry The RAF registered the diary entry at Parliament Street police station in the early hours of July 22, shortly after The Hindu 's report on pellet gun.

Key points

• Rahul Gandhi sits on dharna at police station in New Delhi, demands FIR over pellet gun employ during July 20 protest.
• One of them, Sahil Lochab, 19, risks losing vision in his right eye due to a pellet piercing his pupil, his family remarked.
• After the July 20 incident, the RAF withdrew shock batons, electric shields, pump-action guns, and the anti-riot guns.
• The Hindu documented on July 21 concerning two individuals.
• At least 10 individuals injured by pellets on July 20, indicates RTI response.

For context, the Hindu documented on July 21 concerning two individuals. This person were hit by pellets allegedly fired by RAF personnel, being operated upon at administration hospitals. (Screengrab) Photo Credit: Special Arrangement.

Days after the Delhi Police denied the usage of pellet guns during the July 20 march to Parliament – in which at least four persons documented being hit with pellets – a general diary entry filed at Parliament Street police station reveals that the Rapid Action Force (RAF) did fire two rounds from an anti-riot gun on the directions of a Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) rank officer.

19-year-old may lose vision in right eye due to pellet injury, notes family. How does a pellet gun work?

For context, the Hindu has accessed the general diary entry. It was registered by the RAF at 1: 24 a.m. On July 22. This was the first time that a pellet gun was applied against unarmed protestors in the national capital.

'I apologised, threats did not stop': after Jantar Mantar protest, women face doxxing, calls to 'teach them a lesson'.

After the July 20 incident, the RAF withdrew shock batons, electric shields, pump-action guns, and the anti-riot guns. It fire pellets, from personnel deployed at Jantar Mantar. A review by an RAF Inpsector General additionally highlighted "serious deficiencies" in RAF behaviour during the march, in violation of its principle of "sensitive policing".

Notably, the diary entry notes that, to control the crowd during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest, "on the orders of Zone-1, DCP, Jantar Mantar, " the RAF Deputy Commandant fired "55 rounds of non-electrical shell, 15 rounds of electrical shell, five tear smoke granite, two rounds using ballistic cartridges with plastic pellets from an anti-riot gun." The RAF. It is the anti-riot unit of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), was deployed and was under the operational control of the Delhi Police at the time of the incident. At least 10 individuals injured by pellets on July 20, indicates RTI response.

For context, the diary entry was created hours after The Hindu noted on July 21 that two individuals allegedly hit by pellets fired by RAF personnel had undergone surgery at administration hospitals. One of them, Sahil Lochab, 19, risks losing vision in his right eye due to a pellet piercing his pupil, his family remarked.

According to Police sources, during a law-and-order situation, Central forces, in this case the RAF, are given a general consent by the police officer concerned, to apply all crowd-control equipment at their disposal.

Significantly, in a video conference with RAF personnel after the incident, RAF Inspector General Seema Dhundhia "gave clear directions that during the current Delhi deployment, the situation has been analysed and until further orders pump action guns (PAG), anti-riot Gun (ARG), electric shock weapon, and electric shield shall not be used or issued to personnel."

According to The minutes of the review session accessed by The Hindu, "serious deficiencies were observed in many aspects of the operation, which need to be improved in the future."

For context, the Inspector General reiterated that the core principle of the RAF is "sensitive policing", and directed that the employ of force in every situation must be done only to the necessary extent, in a judicious, fair, restrained, and sensitive manner.

Ms. According to Dhundhia, "some videos available on social media demonstrated incidents of RAF personnel using unnecessary force on persons who had already separated from the crowd, deliberately making individuals fall, and assaulting persons going out of the barricade. Such incidents are completely contrary to the established work culture and image of RAF and are not justified under any circumstances."

She directed that, going forward, all personnel must be clearly briefed that the identity of RAF lies in disciplined, impartial, restrained, and sensitive policing, and that this standard must be strictly followed during every operation.

Notably, the I-G additionally asked RAF personnel to document all events. "If any personnel is injured, the availability of medical records, required documents, and FIRs registered by the concerned state police etc. Must be ensured. Further, the quantum of force applied by RAF, tear gas shells, other crowd control equipment, and related data must fully match with the records of the State police and FIRs. Any kind of factual discrepancy must be avoided and all records must be kept 100% accurate and complete, " she remarked.

Noting the prevalence of social media and mobile cameras in modern times, Ms. Dhundhia cautioned RAF personnel that every operation remains under public scrutiny. "During the observation of various videos and reels available on social media during the protest at Jantar-Mantar, it was discovered that a number of personnel were seen performing duty without body protectors and helmets. It is contrary to the prescribed standards and security-related instructions. Therefore, going forward, before every deployment, it must be ensured that all personnel are fully equipped with the prescribed protective gear, " she remarked.

Retired Intelligence Bureau Special Director Yashovardhan Azad moved the Supreme Court for a ban on pellet guns on July 27, along with two victims of pellet gun injuries, an artist and another professional. They demanded the decommissioning or ban on the employ of wholly or partly metallic kinetic projectiles or pellets fired from pump action rifles or projectile action guns for the purpose of crowd dispersal of civilian assemblies by law enforcement agencies. They additionally sought the grant of exemplary compensation as well as complete medical treatment, care and rehabilitation for all victims of pellet injuries caused by the State action on July 20.

Taken together, the developments around delhi Police authorised pellet gun use against protestors on July 20: RAF point to a situation that is still moving, and the coming days should bring more clarity.