Crowd Control Measures and the Use of Force
Indian Polity & Governance
- PYQs8
- Articles1
Background
This concept is crucial for understanding the delicate balance between maintaining public order and protecting citizens' fundamental rights, the ethical and legal implications of state-sanctioned force, and the accountability of security forces in a democratic society. It directly relates to governance, internal security, and human rights issues in India.
Crowd control measures refer to techniques and tools employed by law enforcement agencies to manage large gatherings, prevent violence, and disperse unruly crowds. While often termed "non-lethal," their application, particularly of weapons like pellet guns, frequently raises significant concerns regarding human rights, proportionality of force, and the potential for severe injuries or fatalities.
Facts & tables
- Pellet Guns
- Originally deployed in J&K in 2010 as a 'non-lethal' alternative, they can cause severe injuries, including blindness, especially when fired at close range or above the waist.
- Evolution of Ammunition
- Following widespread criticism, 'plastic bullets' were introduced in 2017 as a less lethal alternative to metal pellets, designed to be fired from existing weapons.
- Other Measures
- Common crowd control methods include tear gas, water cannons, pepper spray, taser guns, and shock batons, each with specific operational guidelines and potential risks.
- Regulatory Oversight
- The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) prescribes Qualitative Requirements (QRs) for equipment like shock batons, ensuring standards for operational use by security personnel.
| Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Conceptual area | Indian Polity & Governance |
| Conceptual area | Internal Security |
| Body | Role |
|---|---|
| Rapid Action Force (RAF) | Deploys crowd control measures |
| Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) | Parent body of raf, deploys crowd control measures |
| Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) | Prescribes guidelines and qrs for security equipment |
| Ordinance Factory, Ishapore | Manufactures pellet guns |
Prelims angle
Prelims angle: Multi-statement analysis
Prelims angle: Factual recall
- Pellet guns: 'Non-lethal' but cause severe injuries; first used in J&K (2010).
- Plastic bullets: Introduced (2017) as less lethal alternative.
- Other measures: Tear gas, water cannon, shock batons.
- RAF/CRPF: Key forces deploying these measures.
- MHA: Sets QRs for equipment like shock batons.
Check if created by Constitution or by Parliament.
| Year | Framing tags |
|---|---|
| 2026 | Conceptual understanding, Terminology-based question |
| 2025 | Statement-based questions, Factual recall |
| 2025 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2024 | Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions |
| 2023 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2023 | Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall |
| 2022 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2017 | Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall |
Timeline
-
Indian Polity & Governance
Conceptual area
-
Internal Security
Conceptual area
-
Prelims 2017
Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2022
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2023
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2023
Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2024
Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions
-
Prelims 2025
Statement-based questions, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2025
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2026
Conceptual understanding, Terminology-based question
-
Why are pellet guns used as a ‘non-lethal’ crowd-control measure? | Explained
Crowd control measures, including pellet guns and shock batons, are used by security forces to manage protests. While intended to be non-lethal, their use has led to severe injuries and sparked debates on human rights, proportionality of force, and the need for less harmful alternatives.
See also
No related topics linked yet.
Past papers
2017–2026 · 8 questions
In the news
Why are pellet guns used as a ‘non-lethal’ crowd-control measure? | Explained
Crowd control measures, including pellet guns and shock batons, are used by security forces to manage protests. While intended to be non-lethal, their use has led to severe injuries and sparked debates on human rights, proportionality of force, and the need for less harmful alternatives.
Try these PYQs
Consider the following statements :
1. According to the Constitution of India, the Central Government has a duty to protect States from internal disturbances.
2. The Constitution of India exempts the States from providing legal counsel to a person being held for preventive detention.
3. According to the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, confession of the accused before the police cannot be used as evidence.
How many of the above statements are correct?
* Statement 1 is correct: According to Article 355 of the Indian Constitution, it shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. * Statement 2 is correct: Article 22(3)(b) mentions that individuals detained under preventive detention laws are not initially entitled to consult or be defended by a legal practitioner until the grounds of detention are disclosed to them. Although the constitution allows for exceptions in preventive detention cases, it does not prohibit state governments from providing legal counsel to the detained person. The state has the discretion to offer legal assistance if it wishes. * Statement 3 is incorrect: Section 32(1) of POTA 2002 allows confessions made to a police officer of at least Superintendent rank, overriding certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act.
Consider the following pairs:
Provision in the Constitution of India – Stated under
I. Separation of Judiciary from the Executive in the public services of the State : The Directive Principles of the State Policy
II. Valuing and preserving of the rich heritage of our composite culture : The Fundamental Duties
III. Prohibition of employment of children below the age of 14 years in factories : The Fundamental Rights
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
Each of these constitutional provisions is accurately linked to its correct part within the Constitution of India. ✅ Pair I: Directive Principles of State Policy – Correct
* Article 50 mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State. ✅ Pair II: Fundamental Duties – Correct
* Article 51A(f) states that citizens must value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture. ✅ Pair III: Fundamental Rights – Correct
* Article 24 prohibits the employment of children below 14 years in hazardous work such as factories or mines.
X' was addressing a seminar on the meaning of the term 'law' as provided under Article 13, Part III of the Constitution of India. 'X' explained that the meaning of the term 'law' in the Constitution of India was very comprehensive. It included ordinances, orders and even rules and regulations. 'Y' pointed out that the term 'law' in Article 13 also included custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law, to which 'X' was not convinced.
Based on the above, select the correct conclusion from the options given below :
Article 13 of the Indian Constitution provides for the protection of Fundamental Rights and declares that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of Part III of the Constitution shall be void to the extent of the inconsistency. To prevent the State from bypassing Fundamental Rights through executive or traditional means, Article 13(3)(a) provides a highly expansive definition of the term "law". It explicitly states that "law" includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law. Therefore, the view of 'Y' that the term 'law' includes custom or usage is absolutely correct. Because "custom or usage" is expressly listed in the constitutional text, uncodified traditional practices that hold the force of law are subject to the exact same constitutional scrutiny as formal legislative statutes. 'X' is incorrect in doubting or rejecting the inclusion of custom or usage within the definition of law under Article 13. Thus, regarding the point of contention, only the view of 'Y' is correct. Therefore, the correct option is D.
With reference to the writs, issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements:
1. Mandamus will not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public duty.
2. Mandamus will not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company.
3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: Mandamus is a command issued by the court to a public official asking him to perform his official duties that he has failed or refused to perform. It can also be issued against any public body, a corporation, an inferior court, a tribunal, or a government for the same purpose. It is usually not usable against a private entity unless it is entrusted with a public duty. Statement 2 is correct: As explained above, Mandamus can be used against a government corporation and/or company when it is discharging a "public duty", so the statement is incomplete. Public Duty is Key: Mandamus aims to compel performance of a public duty, not just private functions. Statement 3 is correct: Quo Warranto is issued by the court to inquire into the legality of the claim of a person to a public office. Hence, it prevents illegal usurpation of public office by a person. Unlike the other writs, this can be sought by any interested person and not necessarily by the aggrieved person. Note (on Statement 2): In UPSC Prelims, statements must be judged as written, without adding extra conditions. A company does not become subject to the writ of Mandamus only because it is a Government company. Government ownership by itself is not enough. Since Statement 2 is framed in this limited and absolute sense, and no additional condition like “public duty” is mentioned, the statement is treated as correct.
A Writ of Prohibition is an order issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to :
Writ of Prohibition: * It is a judicial order issued by a higher court (Supreme Court or High Court) to a lower court or tribunal. * It prevents the lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to law. * Purpose: To stop ongoing proceedings in a case where the lower court lacks jurisdiction or violates legal procedures. * Nature: It is preventive, ensuring the lower court does not act unlawfully rather than correcting a wrong decision after it has occurred. * Example: If a tribunal starts hearing a case that legally falls under the jurisdiction of a civil court, the Writ of Prohibition can halt such proceedings. * Comparison with Certiorari: Prohibition is issued before judgment to stop proceedings, whereas Certiorari is issued after judgment to quash orders passed unlawfully.
Show 3 more PYQs
With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements:
I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act.
II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right.
III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
An Ordinance is a temporary law issued by the President (Article 123) or Governor (Article 213) when the legislature is not in session. It holds the same force as a regular law, but must adhere to constitutional limits. ✅ Statement I: Correct
* An Ordinance can amend any Central Act, just like a Parliamentary law, subject to constitutional provisions. ❌ Statement II: Incorrect
* Ordinances cannot abridge Fundamental Rights as per Article 13(2) of the Constitution. Any such provision is void. ✅ Statement III: Correct
* Ordinances can be given retrospective effect, i.e., they can be enforced from a past date.
Which of the following are envisaged by the Right against Exploitation in the Constitution of India?
1. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour
2. Abolition of untouchability
3. Protection of the interests of minorities
4. Prohibition of employment of children in factories and mines
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
The Right against Exploitation under the Indian Constitution aims to protect individuals from forced labor, human trafficking, and child exploitation. It specifically includes: - Prohibition of human trafficking and forced labor (Article 23): This article bans begar (forced, unpaid labor), bonded labor, and human trafficking in any form. It also prohibits the state and private entities from compelling people to work without fair wages. - Prohibition of child labor in hazardous occupations (Article 24): This article prohibits the employment of children below the age of 14 in factories, mines, or other hazardous occupations to ensure their safety and well-being. While other rights are crucial, they are not part of the Right against Exploitation: - Abolition of untouchability (Article 17) falls under the Right to Equality and prohibits the practice of untouchability in any form. - Protection of the interests of minorities is covered under Articles 25-30 and primarily falls under the Right to Freedom of Religion and Cultural & Educational Rights. Thus, the Right against Exploitation focuses specifically on preventing forced labor, human trafficking, and child labor, ensuring dignity and freedom from exploitation Therefore, the correct option is (C) 1 and 4 only.
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I: The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India would be limited by Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of the administration.
Statement-II: Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term 'efficiency of administration'.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
* Statement I is correct: It has frequently been argued that reservation is contrary to efficiency and merit. Even the Supreme Court of India appeared to have agreed with this argument in some of its judgments, holding that Article 335 mention of the term efficiency of administration will limit the scope of Article 16(4) provision for reservation in services. * Statement II is incorrect: Article 335 of the Constitution of India states that the claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. * Article 335 of the Indian Constitution only mentions the efficiency of administration and does not define the same.