What Is a Pellet Gun and Can Police Use It on Civilians? Understanding Less-Lethal Weapons

A young protester shields his face as he sees security personnel raise what looks like a rifle. Seconds later, he feels dozens of stinging impacts across his body. He has been hit by a pellet gun, a weapon many Indians associate only with Kashmir but which recent reports suggest has now been deployed during protests in the national capital.

So what exactly is a pellet gun, and what does Indian law say about when police can use such weapons on civilians?

A pellet gun, also called a pump-action gun or multi-pellet shotgun, fires dozens of tiny metal pellets in a single shot. Unlike a conventional firearm that shoots one bullet, a pellet gun sprays a cluster of small projectiles that spread out as they travel. Each pellet is about the size of a small ball bearing. When fired at close range into a crowd, these pellets can hit multiple people and cause injuries ranging from bruises to permanent blindness if they strike the eyes.

Pellet guns are classified as less-lethal or non-lethal weapons. The term less-lethal is more accurate because while these weapons are designed not to kill, they absolutely can cause severe and permanent injury. Medical reports from Kashmir, where pellet guns have been used extensively since 2010, document hundreds of cases of eye injuries, with many victims losing vision in one or both eyes. Pellets can also penetrate soft tissue, damage internal organs if they hit the abdomen or chest, and cause disfigurement.

Now, what does the law say about when police can use such force? The primary legal framework is the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, specifically Section 129 onwards. These sections allow a police officer to use force to disperse an unlawful assembly, but the force used must be proportionate and reasonable. Police must first order the assembly to disperse peacefully. Only if the crowd refuses and becomes violent or poses a serious threat to public order can police escalate to using force.

Even then, the law follows a hierarchy. Police should use the minimum force necessary, starting with verbal warnings, then perhaps using water cannons or tear gas, and only in extreme situations resorting to weapons that can cause bodily harm. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the right to protest is a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution, and any restriction on it must be reasonable and justified.

Importantly, there is no specific law or official policy document that explicitly authorises the use of pellet guns on civilians in most parts of India. The use of such weapons in Kashmir has been controversial and has faced criticism from human rights organisations and even judicial observations questioning whether causing mass blinding can ever be justified. In 2016, the Ministry of Home Affairs set up a committee to find alternatives to pellet guns, acknowledging the serious injuries they cause.

If pellet guns are now being used in other parts of the country during protests, it raises serious legal questions. Was the assembly genuinely violent or unlawful? Did police exhaust all other less harmful methods first? Were officers specifically trained and authorised to use these weapons? And critically, were they deployed in a manner that minimised risk of serious injury?

Victims of alleged police brutality, including those injured by pellet guns, have legal remedies. They can file a complaint with the State Human Rights Commission or the National Human Rights Commission. They can also file a First Information Report against the police officers involved, though this often requires courage and persistence. In cases of serious injury, victims can approach the High Court directly through a writ petition seeking compensation and an investigation into the police action.

The larger principle is this: police have a duty to maintain public order, but they also have a duty to protect the fundamental rights of citizens, including the right to life and bodily integrity under Article 21 of the Constitution. Using weapons that cause indiscriminate injury in a crowd setting can violate these rights.

If you or someone you know has been injured during a protest, document everything. Take photographs of injuries immediately, get medical treatment and keep all medical records, and try to gather eyewitness accounts or video evidence. This documentation becomes crucial if you decide to seek legal recourse.

Understanding your rights during protests and the limits of police powers is not just academic knowledge. It is a practical safeguard in a democracy. If you have witnessed or experienced what you believe is excessive police force, consult a verified advocate on Lex Now to understand your options and the best way forward.

This article is general legal awareness, not legal advice. Laws change and every case is different — consult a verified advocate on Lex Now for guidance on your situation.

Need advice on your situation?

Connect with a verified advocate on Lex Now for guidance specific to your case.