Supreme Court has not barred FIRs against Army personnel in stone pelting incidents
Several posts featuring a graphic claiming that the Supreme Court has said, “There will be no FIR even if people who pelt stones at the army are shot at” are going viral on social media platforms (here, here, here, here, and here). These posts suggest that the Supreme Court has given the armed forces a free hand to take action against stone pelters. In this article, we will fact-check the claim made in these posts.
Claim: The Supreme Court has stated that cases/FIRs should not be registered against soldiers who shoot and kill individuals pelting stones at the army.
Fact: No such order has been given by the Supreme Court. However, under Section 06 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), the approval of the Central Government is mandatory before any legal action can be taken against a soldier acting under the powers conferred by the Act. In March 2018, the Supreme Court put a stay on the FIR filed by Jammu and Kashmir Police, against Major Aditya Kumar of the 10 Garhwal Rifles in connection with the Shopian firing incident that took place on 27 January 2018. In November 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by over 300 Army personnel challenging the registration of FIRs against members of the armed forces for conducting operations in Manipur and Jammu & Kashmir, where the AFSPA is in force. Hence the claim made in the post is MISLEADING.
To verify the veracity of the viral claim, we conducted a relevant keyword search. However, this search did not yield any credible reports supporting the claim. If the Supreme Court had indeed given such directions, it would have been widely reported by the media.
We then visited the Supreme Court’s website to check whether any such judgment or order had been issued. However, we did not find any information supporting the claim there either.
During this search, we found multiple news reports (here, here, and here) published in January 2018 stating that the Jammu and Kashmir Police had registered an FIR against army personnel in connection with the Shopian firing incident that took place on 27 January 2018.
According to these reports, a mob targeted the Army’s Garhwal unit and pelted stones at their convoy in Ganowpora, Shopian district, on 27 January 2018. In response, the army opened fire, resulting in the deaths of two civilians and injuries to nine others. The Jammu and Kashmir Police registered a case against army personnel from the 10 Garhwal Rifles, including Major Aditya Kumar, under Sections 302 (punishment for murder) and 307 (attempt to murder) of the Ranbir Penal Code. The Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) was the primary criminal law of the erstwhile Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, introduced in 1932 and named after Maharaja Ranbir Singh. However, it was repealed and replaced by the Indian Penal Code (IPC) following the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019.
According to reports, Major Aditya Kumar’s father, Karanvir Singh, filed a petition in the Supreme Court in February 2018, seeking the quashing of the FIR against Major Aditya Kumar in connection with the Shopian firing incident that occurred in January 2018, in which three civilians were killed. The petition stated that Major Aditya Kumar was not present at the scene of the incident, and that the army personnel had opened fire solely in self-defence, in accordance with the law and in the discharge of their duties.
On 05 March 2018, the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, while hearing a writ petition filed by Lt Col Karamveer Singh, father of Major Aditya Kumar, put a stay on the FIR and directed that no investigation should proceed against Major Aditya Kumar until the next hearing on 24 April 2018 (here). The court also sought responses from both the Central and State Governments on the matter. During the proceedings, the Supreme Court did not state at any point that registering an FIR against soldiers involved in the shooting of stone pelters was illegal. This stay was later extended (here, here, here). The case remains pending as of 04 April 2025.
However, according to Section 6 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), prior approval from the Central Government is mandatory before initiating any legal action against a soldier or officer acting under the powers granted by the Act.
In November 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by over 300 Army personnel in August 2018, which challenged the registration of FIRs against members of the armed forces for conducting operations in Manipur and Jammu & Kashmir, where the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) is in force. Earlier, in 2016, the Supreme Court had ruled that there would be no “blanket immunity” (i.e. complete protection) for armed forces personnel in cases of alleged unjustified killings, unless it was determined that the deaths had occurred during genuine encounters or insurgency operations.
To sum it up, the Supreme Court has not issued any order stating that cases should not be registered against soldiers who shoot at stone pelters.