New Delhi, August 25, 2026 — India’s security forces used pellet guns, stun grenades, and electric shock devices against student-led protests in 2025 and early 2026, according to a new investigation by Amnesty International. The report, released on August 24, documents a pattern of excessive and indiscriminate force against demonstrators, many of them young activists advocating for education reforms, climate action, and digital rights. The findings have reignited global scrutiny of India’s policing of dissent, particularly against a generation increasingly vocal on social and political issues.
What Happened
Amnesty International’s 87-page report, titled “‘They See Us as Enemies’: India’s Use of Excessive Force Against Gen Z Protesters,” details at least 14 incidents across six Indian states—Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Maharashtra—where security forces allegedly deployed violent crowd-control measures against peaceful or minimally disruptive protests. The report is based on interviews with 78 protesters, medical professionals, lawyers, and journalists, as well as video evidence, police records, and forensic analysis of injuries.
Key Findings:
– Pellet Guns: Security forces fired pellet guns at close range in at least eight incidents, causing severe eye injuries, facial fractures, and internal bleeding. In Delhi, a 19-year-old student lost vision in one eye after being hit during a protest outside Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in November 2025. Medical records reviewed by Amnesty describe “multiple metallic pellets lodged in the orbital cavity,” a pattern consistent with previous reports of pellet gun misuse in Kashmir and other conflict zones.
– Stun Grenades and Tear Gas: Police used stun grenades—military-grade devices designed to disorient—against protesters in Bengaluru and Mumbai, where demonstrations against internet shutdowns turned confrontational. In one incident in Kolkata, a 22-year-old activist suffered second-degree burns after a grenade exploded near her. Amnesty’s analysis of video footage shows police deploying tear gas canisters directly at crowds, rather than lobbing them at an angle, a tactic that increases the risk of direct hits.
– Electric Shock Devices: In Uttar Pradesh, police used electric batons and stun guns on detained protesters, including minors. A 17-year-old student from Aligarh told Amnesty he was shocked repeatedly during interrogation after participating in a climate strike. “They kept asking who was funding us, who was behind the protests,” he said. “When I said I didn’t know, they shocked me again.”
– Mass Arrests and Detention: Over 1,200 protesters were detained during the documented incidents, with many held for days without charges. Amnesty found that at least 45 minors were among those arrested, some of whom reported being denied access to lawyers or family members. In Tamil Nadu, 12 students were charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a stringent anti-terror law, for organizing a protest against fee hikes at state universities.
The report also highlights the role of digital repression in suppressing protests. Authorities in multiple states imposed internet shutdowns during demonstrations, citing “public order” concerns. In Delhi, mobile internet was suspended for 36 hours during a December 2025 protest, disrupting organizers’ ability to coordinate and document police actions. Amnesty’s digital forensics team found evidence of selective throttling of social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Instagram, where protest-related hashtags were temporarily blocked.
Why It Matters
The Amnesty report arrives at a critical juncture for India’s democracy. The country has seen a surge in youth-led protests since 2020, driven by issues ranging from farm laws and citizenship policies to climate change and digital rights. Gen Z—defined here as those born between 1997 and 2012—has emerged as a formidable political force, leveraging social media to mobilize rapidly and challenge established power structures. However, the government’s response has increasingly relied on militarized policing, raising alarms about the erosion of civil liberties.
International Human Rights Violations:
Amnesty’s findings suggest India may have violated multiple international treaties, including:
– The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly (Article 21).
– The UN Convention Against Torture, which prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.
– The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which mandate that force be used only as a last resort and in proportion to the threat.
The report notes that India’s use of pellet guns—banned or restricted in several countries due to their indiscriminate and maiming effects—contradicts the UN’s guidance on less-lethal weapons. Pellet guns, which fire hundreds of small metal projectiles, have been linked to permanent disabilities in Kashmir, where they were first deployed in 2010. Despite repeated calls from human rights groups to ban them, Indian authorities have expanded their use to mainland protests.
Domestic Political Fallout:
The report has intensified criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, which has faced accusations of authoritarian overreach from opposition parties and civil society groups. The Congress Party and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) have demanded a parliamentary inquiry into the allegations, while the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has sought a response from the Ministry of Home Affairs. However, the NHRC’s credibility has been questioned in the past for its lack of enforcement power and perceived bias toward the government.
Economic and Diplomatic Implications:
India’s human rights record has become a growing point of friction in its relations with Western democracies. The U.S. State Department’s 2025 human rights report flagged “excessive use of force by police” as a concern, while the European Parliament passed a resolution in June 2026 urging India to “uphold its constitutional commitments to freedom of expression and assembly.” The Amnesty report could further strain ties, particularly with trade partners like the EU, which has linked its proposed free trade agreement with India to human rights benchmarks.
Background and Context
A Generation in Protest
India’s Gen Z has been at the forefront of some of the country’s most significant social movements in recent years:
– 2020–2021 Farm Laws Protests: Young activists played a key role in organizing solidarity campaigns for farmers, who ultimately forced the government to repeal three controversial agricultural laws.
– 2022 Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) Protests: Students from Jamia Millia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim University led nationwide demonstrations against the law, which critics argued discriminated against Muslims. The protests were met with police violence, including the Delhi riots in February 2020, which left 53 dead.
– 2023–2024 Climate Strikes: Inspired by global movements like Fridays for Future, Indian students staged weekly strikes demanding climate action, often clashing with authorities over permits and police barricades.
– 2025 Digital Rights Protests: After the government introduced new social media regulations requiring platforms to remove “anti-national” content within 24 hours, Gen Z activists organized online and offline protests, accusing the rules of enabling censorship.
A Pattern of Militarized Policing
The Amnesty report is not the first to document excessive force by Indian security forces. Previous investigations by Human Rights Watch (2021), Reuters (2022), and The Wire (2023) have highlighted:
– The use of pellet guns in Kashmir, where over 1,200 people have been partially or fully blinded since 2016.
– Police brutality during the 2020 Delhi riots, where officers were filmed beating unarmed protesters and destroying CCTV cameras.
– Internet shutdowns as a tool of repression. India leads the world in government-imposed internet blackouts, with 106 shutdowns in 2023 alone, according to the Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC).
Legal and Institutional Weaknesses
India’s legal framework provides limited accountability for police misconduct. Key issues include:
– Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): Requires government sanction to prosecute police officers for actions taken “in the discharge of their official duty,” effectively shielding them from legal consequences.
– Lack of Independent Oversight: Police forces in most states report to political executives, creating conflicts of interest. The Supreme Court’s 2006 Prakash Singh judgment, which mandated police reforms, remains largely unimplemented.
– Misuse of Anti-Terror Laws: The UAPA and sedition laws have been used to criminalize dissent, with over 5,000 UAPA cases filed between 2014 and 2022, according to Article 14, a legal research group.
What to Watch Next
1. Government Response
The Indian government has dismissed Amnesty’s report as “biased and motivated,” a stance consistent with its past responses to human rights criticism. However, the scale of the evidence—including medical records, videos, and witness testimonies—may force a more substantive reply. Key questions:
– Will the Ministry of Home Affairs order an independent inquiry into the allegations?
– Will state governments suspend or prosecute officers found to have used excessive force?
– Will the Supreme Court take up the issue, as it did in the 2021 farmers’ protests case, where it stayed the farm laws pending review?
2. International Reactions
The report is likely to escalate diplomatic pressure on India. Watch for:
– Statements from the U.S., EU, and UN: The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has already called for a “transparent investigation.” The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) may push for India to be designated a “Country of Particular Concern” in its 2027 report.
– Trade Implications: The EU’s proposed free trade agreement with India includes a human rights clause. The Amnesty report could delay or derail negotiations.
– Corporate Fallout: Multinational companies operating in India, particularly in tech and manufacturing, may face increased scrutiny from shareholders and consumers over their presence in a country with a deteriorating human rights record.
3. Protester Strategies
Gen Z activists are likely to adapt their tactics in response to the crackdown. Potential shifts include:
– Decentralized Organizing: Moving away from large, centralized protests to smaller, flash-mob-style gatherings to evade police surveillance.
– Digital Resistance: Increased use of encrypted messaging apps (like Signal and Telegram) and VPNs to bypass internet shutdowns.
– Legal Challenges: Filing public interest litigations (PILs) in high courts to challenge police brutality and internet shutdowns.
– International Advocacy: Partnering with global human rights groups to name and shame the Indian government at UN forums and international media.
4. Long-Term Democratic Impact
The crackdown on Gen Z protests could have far-reaching consequences for India’s democracy:
– **Chilling
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: Al Jazeera News — source
