On August 10th, thousands of students joined a massive "Vidhan Sabha Gherao" march, heading toward the Jharkhand state assembly in Ranchi. Their primary grievance revolves around widespread irregularities and administrative failures across several key recruitment examinations. As these student-led demonstrations continue to gain momentum throughout Jharkhand, the Ranchi Police officially announced that they are prepared to deploy pellet guns against the student marchers in the event of an "emergency."

Speaking to members of the press, Ranchi City Superintendent of Police (SP) Paras Rana explained that a heavy police presence had been arranged strictly as a protective measure to ensure the general public is not put to any inconvenience. At the same time, he emphasized that law enforcement would strictly enforce legal remedies against anyone attempting to instigate acts of violence.

Focusing on the ground strategy, SP Rana stated: “There will be a large number of students. Instructions have been issued to all Ranchi Police personnel that if the protesters conduct themselves peacefully, no inconvenience will be caused to anyone. However, if anyone attempts to resort to violence, appropriate legal action will be taken against them.”

When questioned directly about a widely shared video that showed police personnel carrying firearms equipped for crowd control, SP Rana clarified that the gear in the clip was actually a paintball gun designed to fire soft, paint-filled rounds intended to mark and identify specific troublemakers in a crowd. Nevertheless, the officer confirmed that actual pellet guns are present on site, strictly kept as a backup for extreme emergency scenarios.

Elaborating on this distinction, the officer added: “If a pellet gun is being carried, it is strictly for emergency situations. Regarding the viral video—what is being mistaken for a pellet gun is actually a paintball gun; it fires soft, colored balls used to mark and identify troublemakers. It is not a pellet gun.”

Technically speaking, pellet guns are 12-bore pump-action shotguns that discharge cartridges filled with small metal pellets. Classified within law enforcement protocols as non-lethal or less-lethal crowd control equipment, these weapons form standard tactical gear for specialized riot control formations across various jurisdictions.

Interestingly, the minimal public reaction and silence from political commentators regarding the handling of these weeks-long student protests by the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) and Congress coalition government stands in sharp contrast to the intense outrage directed at law enforcement during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) demonstrations in Delhi this past July.

Political Outrage Over Delhi Police's Supposed Weaponry Turns to Silence During the Ranchi Student Demonstrations

Not long ago, when the CJP protests escalated into violence during the 'Chalo Sansad' march on July 20th, the Delhi Police responded using lathicharge and other standard crowd-control procedures. Following the clash, various political commentators and opposition parties immediately accused the Delhi Police of using pellet guns against student marchers, despite the crowd containing numerous organized political activists.

Key figures across political parties, including the Congress and the Samajwadi Party along with their allied platforms, launched widespread criticism targeting the Delhi Police over unverified claims regarding pellet gun usage.

At the height of the controversy, CJP spokesperson Saurav Das publicly asserted that the Delhi Police had turned pellet guns on “peaceful protesters,” circulating footage of physical marks on a participant’s body as evidence.

This narrative persisted despite immediate and official denials from law enforcement representatives. Setting the record straight, the Delhi Police issued an official statement reading: “Claims of pellet guns being used against peaceful protesters by Delhi Police on Monday are completely false and misleading. Delhi Police neither possesses pellet guns nor were they used during the ongoing protest. The public is requested not to share or circulate any unverified or misleading information.”

During those same New Delhi protests, violent factions among the CJP supporters went as far as attempting to corner Rapid Action Force (RAF) personnel, recording and distributing their visual identities online to encourage targeting. Critics routinely framed the police's reaction to stone-pelting crowds as state-sponsored repression and an attempt to crush democratic rights through raw force.

Yet, those same vocal critics have remained noticeably quiet regarding Ranchi Police's open admission that they are fully prepared to use actual pellet guns during emergency situations against student demonstrators in JMM-Congress governed Jharkhand.

This difference in commentary suggests a selective approach where crowd-control measures are condemned primarily when applied in BJP-administered regions. The very same media houses that regularly raise concerns over state overreach seem untroubled by Ranchi authorities equipping themselves with pellet guns for emergency use.

While the Delhi Police maintained they do not even stock pellet guns, official Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and historical observations from the Supreme Court do allow their strictly controlled, last-resort use when milder interventions prove ineffective. However, when law enforcement in non-BJP states openly acknowledges preparing these exact shotguns to control potential unrest, the broader public discourse remains largely neutral.

Furthermore, the Delhi Police had exercised considerable restraint during the initial weeks of the CJP movement. Demonstrators were permitted to assemble at Jantar Mantar for over a month without forced dispersals; even hunger-striking activist Sonam Wangchuk was moved to a hospital facility only after a direct judicial directive. Strict interventions on July 20th occurred only after the crowd turned violent, prompting police and RAF units to execute proportionate lathicharges in line with established SOPs.

Despite the resolution of the events, political parties continue to use the July 20th incident to paralyze parliamentary proceedings, demanding formal statements from senior leadership. Weeks after the CJP protests concluded, domestic and international coverage continues to portray the Delhi Police's response as excessive, while formal petitions have been brought before the Supreme Court seeking strict restrictions or total bans on pellet gun equipment.

Selective Standards on State Action: How Law Enforcement Tactics Get Redefined Based on the Region

The broader network of commentators who remain quiet about the student crackdown in Jharkhand continues to characterize the Delhi Police's actions during the CJP march as an example of authoritarian overreach by the Central Government.

Conversely, now that the JMM-Congress coalition in Jharkhand has deployed water cannons, used lathicharge tactics, and placed pellet-gun units on standby against students protesting civil service exam irregularities across the JPSC and JSSC, those same political commentators have raised little to no concern.

The disparity extends beyond crowd-control weaponry; it reflects a broader silence surrounding the core issues raised by the Jharkhand students. Any minor commentary offered appears largely symbolic, similar to the superficial support CJP extended toward the Ranchi students. This pattern suggests that principles regarding democratic dissent and civil rights are invoked unevenly depending on which political party heads the state government.

On the ground in Ranchi, Jharkhand Police have erected heavy barbed-wire barriers, lathi-charged groups of peacefully assembled students, and deployed personnel armed with pellet shotguns. Concurrently, press members covering the events have faced direct interference and administrative pressure—a stark contrast to the claims of state repression voiced during the stone-pelting incidents in New Delhi.

Instances of press restriction in Jharkhand have been documented:

• On August 9th, a field reporter questioning Chief Minister Hemant Soren regarding JPSC examination reforms was escorted away by police officers and blocked from approaching the main venue stage just a short distance from the protest location.
• Journalist Aman Chopra was formally booked, detained, and interrogated by local authorities simply for reporting on the student movement, later confirming that police had restricted his freedom to cover the Ranchi demonstrations.
• Independent media personnel, including reporters from OpIndia such as Keshav Malan, faced questioning and field intimidation from police details while attempting to cover the ground reality.

In contrast, despite widespread misinformation circulated by various media outlets during the month-long CJP demonstrations in New Delhi, the Delhi Police did not file legal cases against journalists covering the events.

In New Delhi, neutral reporters were often shouted down and confronted by protest groups, actions that were frequently brushed aside online. The resulting dynamic reveals a clear double standard: when non-BJP state governments deploy heavy barricades, place pellet guns on standby, charge peaceful student groups, and restrict journalists, these actions are quietly excused as necessary measures for public order.