Legal and Ethical Issues in the Use of Force by Police During Public Protests in India

Legal and Ethical Issues in the Use of Force by Police During Public Protests have become increasingly significant in India's constitutional democracy. While the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to peaceful protest, the State also bears the responsibility of maintaining public order. The growing use of tear gas, pellet guns, rubber bullets, shock batons, and lathi charges during demonstrations has raised serious constitutional, legal, ethical, and human rights concerns. This article examines the legal and ethical issues involved in police use of force during public protests and suggests measures to ensure accountability without undermining effective policing.

Introduction

• The right to peaceful protest constitutes an essential component of India's constitutional democracy and is protected under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), and 19(1)(c) as the freedoms of speech, peaceful assembly, and association.
• Simultaneously, the State bears the constitutional responsibility of maintaining public order through reasonable restrictions under Articles 19(2) and 19(3) and statutory powers provided under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
• The increasing use of tear gas, pellet guns, shock batons, rubber bullets, and lathi charges during protests has generated significant legal, ethical, and human rights concerns.

I. Legal and Ethical Issues

1. Constitutional Limitations

• While the BNSS empowers an Executive Magistrate or an authorised police officer to order the dispersal of unlawful assemblies that threaten public peace, such powers are not absolute.
• Every exercise of police power remains subject to constitutional scrutiny under Articles 14, 19, and 21, requiring that restrictions on protests satisfy the tests of legality, necessity, and proportionality.
• Excessive use of force, including indiscriminate lathi charges, tear gas, pellet guns, or shock batons against peaceful demonstrators can amount to arbitrary deprivation of liberty and bodily integrity.
• Constitutional governance therefore requires that force be employed only when persuasion, negotiation, and warning have demonstrably failed, ensuring that maintenance of public order does not extinguish the democratic right to dissent.
• Case Law: In Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court held that while authorities may regulate demonstrations to maintain public order, they cannot extinguish the constitutional right to protest altogether.

2. Human Rights Concerns

• International human rights standards recognise that policing and protection of civil liberties are complementary objectives.
• The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms (1990) require that force be lawful, necessary, and proportionate, while the NHRC Manual on Human Rights for Police Officers similarly emphasizes that coercive measures must remain the last resort.
• The deployment of crowd-control weapons classified as "non-lethal" often raises serious ethical concerns because their misuse may result in permanent disabilities, severe injuries, or fatalities.
• Pellet guns, although intended to immobilize protesters, have caused irreversible blindness and fatal injuries, demonstrating that the distinction between "non-lethal" and "less-lethal" weapons depends primarily upon responsible deployment rather than technological design.
• For example, pellet guns were first deployed during the 2010 Kashmir unrest, and their extensive use during the 2016 Kashmir protests resulted in mass blinding injuries, prompting the Government to subsequently introduce plastic bullets as an alternative crowd-control mechanism.

3. Democratic Legitimacy, Public Trust and Ethical Policing

• Police derive legitimacy not merely from statutory authority but from public confidence that state power will be exercised fairly, impartially, and without political bias.
• Excessive force during peaceful demonstrations weakens democratic participation, discourages lawful dissent, and creates perceptions of selective or politically motivated policing.
• Ethical policing requires balancing the competing responsibilities of protecting public safety while respecting constitutional freedoms.
• Frequent resort to coercive methods instead of dialogue contributes to militarisation of civil policing, wherein citizens increasingly perceive the police as instruments of force rather than institutions of public service.
• Examples include allegations of excessive police action during the CAA-NRC protests, Farmers' protests, 2023 Wrestlers' protest, NEET demonstrations, and the use of pellet guns during the 2026 Delhi youth protests.

II. Institutional and Operational Challenges

1. Inadequate Training and Outdated Policing Practices

• Effective crowd management requires specialised skills in negotiation, conflict resolution, crowd psychology, human rights law, and graduated use-of-force techniques.
• Many police personnel continue to rely on conventional coercive methods because of inadequate training in modern crowd-control strategies and constitutional policing.
• Deficiencies in forensic capacity, cyber investigation skills, weapon handling, and human rights education further reduce institutional professionalism.
• Inadequate exposure to gender-sensitive policing and de-escalation techniques often results in avoidable confrontations, wrongful arrests, and erosion of public confidence.
• The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) highlighted deficiencies in police training infrastructure and capacity-building in the Performance Audit Report on Modernisation of Police Forces (2016).

2. Weak Police Modernisation and Accountability Mechanisms

• Modern democratic policing increasingly relies on technology, transparency, and documentation.
• However, inadequate digital infrastructure, outdated equipment, and poor forensic support reduce operational efficiency and increase dependence upon physical coercion.
• Weak institutional oversight and delayed investigations into allegations of police misconduct reduce deterrence and public confidence.
• Independent complaints mechanisms remain inadequately implemented despite repeated recommendations for police reforms.

3. Weak Community Policing and Declining Public Confidence

• Sustainable law enforcement depends upon trust between the police and the community.
• Marginalised groups often hesitate to approach police institutions due to previous experiences of discrimination, excessive force, or custodial violence.
• Community-oriented policing emphasises continuous engagement with citizens before conflicts escalate.
• Initiatives such as Janamaithri Police (Kerala) and Mohalla Committees (Maharashtra) demonstrate how citizen engagement strengthens public trust and law-and-order management.

III. Measures to Ensure Accountability Without Undermining Effective Policing

1. Strengthening Constitutional and Institutional Accountability

• Police reforms should enhance professional autonomy while strengthening public accountability.
• Implementation of the Prakash Singh reforms, including independent Police Complaints Authorities, would improve oversight.
• Transparent investigations, judicial review, and prompt compensation for proven violations reinforce constitutional accountability.
• Case Law: In Anita Thakur v. State of Jammu & Kashmir (2016), the Supreme Court held that excessive police force violated fundamental rights and awarded compensation.

2. Promoting Rights-Based and Technology-Enabled Policing

• Crowd-control protocols should institutionalise persuasion, negotiation, warnings, and minimum necessary force.
• Standard Operating Procedures governing tear gas, pellet guns, plastic bullets, and shock batons should be periodically reviewed.
• Body-worn cameras, CCTV recording, GPS-enabled deployment monitoring, and digital documentation can significantly improve transparency.
• Operational protocols requiring minimal force and aiming below the waist help reduce unintended injuries.

3. Building Professional, Inclusive and Community-Oriented Policing

• Continuous investment in police training, forensic infrastructure, cyber capabilities, negotiation skills, and human rights education is essential.
• Expanding women's representation and promoting diversity strengthen gender-sensitive policing.
• Community policing, dialogue with civil society, public awareness programmes, and confidence-building measures reduce confrontation.
• The Ministry of Home Affairs has prescribed Qualitative Requirements (QRs) for handheld shock batons to improve operational safety.

Conclusion

The constitutional right to protest and the State's responsibility to preserve public order are not mutually exclusive but mutually reinforcing pillars of democratic governance. Effective policing derives legitimacy not from indiscriminate force but from adherence to legality, necessity, proportionality, and accountability. Strengthening police reforms, institutional oversight, community engagement, technological transparency, and professional training can ensure that law enforcement remains both operationally effective and constitutionally compliant.