The use of firearms

THE report of the Select Committee on T Rangachariar’s Bill to regulate the use of firearms for dispersing unlawful assemblies has at last been published. The Bill, as it has emerged from the Select Committee, is the absolute minimum that can meet the requirements of the case. It is as much the duty of the Government to prevent by law the excesses of its own officials as it is its duty to prevent breaches of the peace by members of the public, for Government officials, and especially the police and soldiery, cognisant as they are of having the authority and support of the Government at their back, are at least as liable to do wrong as the mob itself when its passions have been excited. It is for this reason that according to the Common Law in England, private citizens and officials are on the same footing in the matter of the suppression of riots and breaches of the public peace; and all persons, officials and non-officials, soldiers and policemen, acting in excess of their powers are equally liable not only to be sued for damages but to be criminally prosecuted for their actions. Unlike India, no special immunity attaches to those who may have to suppress a riot or popular commotion; and the law on the subject is reducible to the elementary legal principle that everybody has the right to repel force by force, provided that he does not exceed the requirements of self-defence. Rangachariar’s Bill, as amended by the Select Committee, does no more than approximate the law in India to the English Common Law in certain respects, though not in all.