RAF diary entry shows Delhi Police authorised pellet gun use on July 20

1. At a Glance

• A General Diary (GD) entry at Parliament Street police station, registered at 1.24 a.m. on July 22, 2026, confirms the Rapid Action Force (RAF) fired an anti-riot gun (pellets) on July 20 during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) "Sansad Chalo" march to Parliament. [1][2]
• Significant because Delhi Police had earlier categorically denied any pellet gun use, despite at least four protesters reporting pellet injuries. [1][2]
• Marks the first recorded instance of pellet gun use against unarmed protesters in the national capital, reviving the post-2016 Kashmir pellet-gun policy debate in a new geography. [3][4]
• Tests UPSC candidates on crowd-control SOPs, use-of-force doctrine, RAF/CRPF institutional structure, and executive-magistrate/DCP powers under policing law. [4]

2. Why in the News

• On July 20, 2026, RAF personnel fired munitions — including plastic pellets from an anti-riot gun — at CJP protesters near Parliament/Jantar Mantar/Connaught Place, Delhi. [1][2]
• Delhi Police initially denied pellet use; the GD entry accessed by The Hindu and corroborated by other outlets confirmed firing occurred "on the orders of Zone-1 DCP, Jantar Mantar." [1][2][3]
• Following the incident, RAF withdrew shock batons, electric shields, pump-action guns, and anti-riot (pellet-firing) guns from personnel deployed at Jantar Mantar. [1]
• A review by an RAF Inspector-General flagged "serious deficiencies" in RAF conduct, calling it a violation of the force's "sensitive policing" principle. [1]
• A CRPF inquiry separately found an RAF jawan at Connaught Place fired at least seven pellet rounds, five of which hit peaceful protesters. [3]

3. Background & Evolution

• RAF is a specialised wing of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), raised in 1992 for riot/communal-violence control, trained in "sensitive policing" (minimum force, non-partisan conduct). [4]
• Pellet guns / anti-riot guns (ARGs) entered the Indian crowd-control arsenal prominently after the 2010 Kashmir unrest, formalised for use by 2016 during the post-Burhan Wani unrest in J&K, where pellet injuries (including blindings) caused major controversy. [4]
• Following the 2016 backlash, the Union Government constituted an Expert Committee (July 26, 2016) to find alternatives to pellet guns (e.g., PAVA/chilli-based shells); recommendations were meant to inform operational guidelines. [4]
• Until July 20, 2026, pellet guns had not been officially used against protesters in Delhi, making this the first such confirmed instance in the capital. [1][3]

4. Core Static Facts

[1][2][3][4]

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

• Use of force by police/RAF for crowd control is governed by SOPs requiring weapons to be aimed below the waist; deployment authorised by an executive officer (DCP) under statutory/executive powers to manage public order. [4]
• Raises questions under Article 19(1)(b) (right to peaceful assembly) vs. reasonable restrictions under Article 19(3), and potential Article 21 concerns (right to life/dignity) if disproportionate force is used.
• Denial of pellet use by Delhi Police, later contradicted by official records, raises accountability and truthfulness-in-governance concerns.

Administrative / Governance

• Highlights command accountability — force was used "on orders of" a specific DCP, raising questions on delegation of use-of-force authority to a single officer.
• Internal RAF Inspector-General review flagging "serious deficiencies" shows an internal oversight mechanism functioning, but post-facto rather than preventive.
• Demonstrates coordination gaps between CRPF (RAF) and Delhi Police in joint law-and-order operations — RAF is a central force operating under local police direction.

Ethical / Human Rights

• Pellet guns are a controversial "less-lethal" weapon — 2016 Kashmir experience showed risk of blinding and serious injury even when "non-lethal."
• Case exemplifies tension between crowd control necessity and proportionality/human rights of protesters.

Historical

• Draws a direct parallel to 2016 Kashmir pellet gun controversy, which led to the Expert Committee and calls for PAVA shells as alternatives — this incident reopens that unresolved policy question in a new context (Delhi, not J&K).

Social

• Protesters at CJP march reportedly linked to NEET paper-leak issue, connecting this policing episode to the broader socio-political debate on examination integrity and student unrest.

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• July 20, 2026: CJP "Sansad Chalo" march to Parliament; RAF fires anti-riot gun rounds, including pellets, at protesters near Jantar Mantar/Connaught Place. [1][2]
• Days after July 20: Delhi Police publicly denies pellet gun usage despite protester injury reports. [1]
• July 22, 2026, 1.24 a.m.: General Diary entry registered at Parliament Street PS documenting the RAF firing, accessed later by The Hindu. [1]
• Post-July 22: RAF withdraws pellet-firing anti-riot guns, pump-action guns, shock batons, electric shields from Jantar Mantar deployment. [1]
• Ongoing: RAF Inspector-General review and separate CRPF inquiry both examine conduct; CRPF inquiry finds 7 pellet rounds fired, 5 hits on protesters at Connaught Place. [1][3]
• July 28–29, 2026: Media (The Hindu, Tribune, TheWire, ThePrint, TheFederal, Onmanorama) report on the leaked diary entry, forcing public acknowledgment of the earlier denial's inaccuracy. [1][2][3][5]

7. Prelims Hooks

• RAF (Rapid Action Force) is a specialised wing of the CRPF, raised for riot control, guided by the principle of "sensitive policing."
• The GD entry on pellet gun use was registered at Parliament Street police station, Delhi.
• GD entry timestamp: 1.24 a.m., July 22, 2026.
• Underlying incident date: July 20, 2026 — "Sansad Chalo" march by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).
• Order for firing came from a Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Zone-1, Jantar Mantar.
• Diary entry records 55 rounds non-electrical shell, 15 electrical shell, 5 tear-smoke shells, 2 pellet rounds fired.
• A separate CRPF inquiry found 7 pellet rounds fired at Connaught Place, 5 hitting protesters.
• This was the first confirmed use of pellet guns against unarmed protesters in Delhi.
• Post-incident, RAF withdrew pump-action guns, anti-riot (pellet) guns, electric shields, and shock batons from Jantar Mantar deployment.
• An RAF Inspector-General review found "serious deficiencies" in RAF conduct during the march.
• CRPF (Central Reserve Police Force) — a Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
• Pellet gun policy controversy originally rose to national prominence during the 2016 Kashmir unrest (post-Burhan Wani).
• The Union Government's Expert Committee on pellet-gun alternatives was set up on July 26, 2016.
• SOP for crowd-control firearm use requires aiming below the waist.
• Delhi Police had initially denied pellet gun use before the diary entry surfaced.

8. Mains Relevance

• GS-II: Governance, transparency and accountability of government; Role of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs); Centre-State coordination in policing (Delhi being under central MHA jurisdiction for police).
• GS-III: Internal security — Role of CAPFs in internal security and crowd management; use-of-force doctrine.
• GS-IV: Ethics in public administration — accountability, truthfulness, proportionality in the exercise of state power.
• Possible Mains question stems: 1. "Discuss the doctrine of 'minimum force' in crowd control and evaluate India's institutional mechanisms for oversight of Central Armed Police Forces in this regard." (GS-III) 2. "Examine the constitutional and ethical issues involved when law-enforcement agencies deny facts later contradicted by official records." (GS-II/GS-IV) 3. "Central Armed Police Forces operate under dual accountability — the Centre and local police administration. Discuss the challenges this poses for command responsibility, with reference to recent crowd-control incidents." (GS-II/III)

9. Related Topics to Study Next

• 2016 Kashmir pellet gun controversy & Expert Committee recommendations — direct historical precedent for this issue.
• Structure of Central Armed Police Forces (CRPF, RAF, BSF, CISF, ITBP, SSB) — institutional context for RAF.
• Delhi Police's unique administrative status (under MHA, not Delhi government) — relevant to accountability questions.
• Right to peaceful assembly (Article 19(1)(b)) and reasonable restrictions (Article 19(3)) — constitutional lens.
• Use-of-force continuum / non-lethal weapons policy in India (PAVA shells, tear gas, water cannons).
• NEET examination controversy/paper leaks — the substantive grievance behind the CJP protest.
• Police reforms in India — Model Police Act, Justice Verma Committee, judicial oversight of police powers.

10. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Do not confuse RAF (Rapid Action Force) with the Indian Air Force or the UK's Royal Air Force — in Indian exam context RAF = CRPF's riot-control wing.
• Do not assume Delhi Police reports to the Delhi (state) government — Delhi Police falls under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India (relevant for accountability analysis).
• Do not conflate this incident with the 2016 Kashmir pellet gun episode — same weapon type but different geography, force (there, CRPF/J&K Police), and political context.
• Distinguish General Diary (GD) entry from an FIR — a GD/DD entry is a record of routine occurrences at a police station, not a criminal complaint.
• Avoid assuming pellet guns are official standard-issue for all police forces — their use is situational/authorised on order of specific executive officers (DCP-level), not automatic.