Central Reserve Police Force Director General Gyanendra Pratap Singh has told personnel to carry out legitimate duties “fearlessly”, saying he would accept responsibility for decisions taken in good faith, as the force faces scrutiny over alleged pellet-gun firing during a student protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.Singh’s intervention came as the Supreme Court examined the conduct of the CRPF’s Rapid Action Force during the Cockroach Janta Party’s July 20 march towards Parliament. Protest organisers have accused security personnel of using pellet ammunition against demonstrators campaigning over examination paper leaks, recruitment delays and alleged failures in the education system.
Addressing CRPF personnel, Singh said actions performed in the bona fide discharge of duty would receive the organisation’s backing. He urged officers and jawans not to become hesitant because of public controversy or legal scrutiny, while stressing that operational decisions must serve the national interest.
“Whatever decisions you take and whatever actions you carry out in the national interest, do them fearlessly,” Singh said. “I will take responsibility.”
The remarks have drawn attention because they were made while the Supreme Court is seeking documentary evidence to establish whether pellet rounds were fired, who authorised their use and whether the situation justified such force. The court has directed the authorities to preserve and produce the Rapid Action Force ammunition log connected to the protest.
Judges said pellet guns could be used only in exceptional situations, while making clear that the circumstances surrounding the Jantar Mantar action required examination. The court also directed the Delhi government to ensure medical treatment for protesters who suffered pellet injuries.
The proceedings have intensified debate over the distinction between institutional support for security personnel and individual accountability for potentially excessive force. Police and paramilitary commanders routinely argue that personnel must be protected from prosecution for lawful decisions made under pressure. Civil liberties advocates maintain that assurances of institutional backing must not weaken scrutiny when demonstrators suffer serious injuries.
CJP leaders have challenged the suggestion that the July 20 gathering presented conditions warranting pellet ammunition. Party spokesperson Saurav Das asked whether such weapons could ever be justified against peaceful protesters and demanded a transparent account of the chain of command.
The organisation’s founder, Abhijeet Dipke, has alleged that the crackdown could not have occurred without approval from the highest levels of the Union government. He has demanded Home Minister Amit Shah’s resignation, accusing the authorities of using disproportionate force to suppress a youth-led campaign.
The government has not accepted those allegations. Authorities have maintained that security personnel encountered a volatile situation as protesters attempted to move beyond permitted areas towards Parliament. Investigators and the court are now examining video recordings, deployment documents, medical evidence and ammunition records to reconstruct the sequence of events.
The dispute has placed the Rapid Action Force, a specialised CRPF unit trained for riot and crowd-control operations, at the centre of a politically sensitive confrontation. Its personnel are expected to follow a graduated response, beginning with warnings and physical barriers before escalating to water cannon, tear smoke or other less-lethal measures when required.
Pellet-firing shotguns are classified as less lethal than conventional firearms but can cause severe injuries. A single cartridge can disperse hundreds of small metal projectiles over a broad area, making it difficult to control where they strike. Eye injuries, permanent loss of vision and wounds to the face and upper body have fuelled long-running opposition to their use in civilian crowd control.
The July 20 confrontation followed weeks of demonstrations organised by the CJP, a youth-driven platform that has mobilised students over alleged irregularities in competitive examinations and public recruitment. Its campaign expanded from demands for action against paper leaks into a wider challenge over unemployment, institutional accountability and policing methods.
The agitation was later withdrawn after negotiations with a government delegation and assurances that its five-point charter would be considered. Tensions persisted, however, over criminal cases lodged against participants and claims that students continued to face detention and questioning.
CJP representatives have demanded the formal withdrawal of all protest-related cases rather than administrative assurances that proceedings will not be pursued. Das has warned that demonstrators could return to the streets if commitments made during negotiations are not implemented.
