The Centre is working on a secret “weapon” to disperse violent crowds in Jammu & Kashmir as an alternative to pellet guns used by security personnel in the State at present.
There is no word yet on what that crowd-dispersing technique will be. However, the Centre informed the Supreme Court on Monday that the “weapon” is undergoing trial in a Government laboratory at Chandigarh.
The disclosure came as part of the Centre’s submission defending the use of pellet guns, which has been challenged in a PIl filed by the Jammu & Kashmir High Court Bar Association. The Bench of Chief Justice JS Khehar, Justices DY Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul asked the association leaders present in the court to think with an open, unbiased mind and make suggestions within two weeks for remedying the situation in the Valley. The matter will be heard next on April 28.
The lawyer body had charged the Army with committing excesses and sought an end to use of pellet guns by listing the number of lives lost and the number of those grievously injured. The Bench even gave the option of using lazer dazer, a non-lethal weapon that shines disorienting, nauseating bursts of intense green laser light into a target’s eyes, and foul smelling water as a non-lethal approach to dispensing the crowd.
Attorney-General Rohatgi presented a report of the Ministry of Home Affairs informing the Bench how the situation in J&K is different from any other part of the country. He said the options of chilli spray, lazer dazer, and foul smelling water were unlikely to succeed as protesters cover their face with cloth and sport sunglasses.
He presented photographs of recent protests to show how protesters arm themselves with stones, grenades, acid bottles, Molotov Cocktails and petrol bombs to attack the security personnel and damage the armoured vehicles.
“If a crowd is upon you, a pellet gun is used as a last resort which is fired below the knee,” the A-G said.
As per the Standard Operating Procedure the pellet gun is the sixth tier of defence and least lethal. However, the A-G pointed out that a new weapon was being devised, but he withheld details.
Going through the material placed before it, the Bench told the petitioner, “You can’t take sides, as being a lawyer body you are in the middle, neither being part of the administration nor the mob. If you are sincere, you can help us as we feel we can play a very important role. The question is, will you scuttle it or use this historic opportunity for the benefit of the people and the State. Pool your thoughts and give suggestions to us on an affidavit in two weeks.”
The bar leaders had a different take on the photographs of protestors shown by the A-G and claimed it was the security forces who charge first on the protestors. The Bench pointed out that the protestors are mostly children or youths aged up to 28 years while there is nobody in the 40s, 50s, or 60s. “Why should children of such tender age be there,” the Bench remarked, adding it was for the bar leaders to propose a solution in the interest of law, instead of taking sides on such a sensitive issue.