
If police don't fire, should they take bullets?: CM Yogi defends police action
India Today
"People are questioning why the police fired. If the police don't fire, should they get shot instead?" Adityanath asked, defending the use of armed force when required. He said police personnel are equipped and trained to counter armed criminals and must act decisively in such situations.
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Tuesday defended the government’s zero-tolerance policy against crime, questioning criticism of police action against criminals and asking whether police should “take bullets” if they do not fire in response.
Speaking at the opening ceremony of the Uttar Pradesh Pharma Conclave 1.0, the Chief Minister said strict and consistent enforcement of the policy had strengthened public safety, pointing to the peaceful conduct of major festivals and celebrations over the past nine years as evidence. He said firm police action was essential to maintain law and order and that criminals must be dealt with “in the language they understand.”
“People are questioning why the police fired. If the police don’t fire, should they get shot instead?” Adityanath asked, defending the use of armed force when required. He said police personnel are equipped and trained to counter armed criminals and must act decisively in such situations.
The Chief Minister added that police action is initiated within the framework of the law, but in certain situations swift decisions become necessary when offenders ignore statutory warnings.
"If a criminal has the freedom to fire a gun, then the police officers have also been given pistols so that they can counter criminals. They have been trained for this very purpose. They should deal with the criminals in the language they understand," the Chief Minister said.
"When the government initiated action against criminals, police officers tried to do so within the bounds of the law. But this doesn't always happen and in some situations, when offenders are not afraid of the law, it becomes necessary to bring them within the ambit of the law and explain them in the language they understand," he added.

This moment comes days after the Supreme Court allowed Harish Rana to die with dignity – a historic first court-ordered case of passive euthanasia in India. The court acknowledged the medical opinion that Rana will never recover and that the tubes that feed him and keep him alive are only prolonging his pain.












