A fresh controversy has emerged amid the ongoing student protests after viral images on social media claimed that tear gas shells used during the police action had already crossed their expiry date. The images, which have been widely circulated online, appear to show a tear gas shell marked with a manufacturing date of December 2022 and an expiry date of December 2025.
The claim has quickly become a major point of debate, with several protesters alleging that expired crowd-control equipment was used against demonstrators. According to them, if the markings shown in the viral photographs are genuine and the shell was recently fired during the protest, questions arise over whether standard operating procedures were followed.
Several social media users have shared close-up photographs of the shell, pointing to the printed expiry date and demanding an independent investigation. The images have been reposted thousands of times, with many users asking authorities to clarify whether the shell was actually used during the protest and, if so, why an allegedly expired munition was still in operational stock.
However, it is important to note that these claims have not yet been independently verified. At the time of writing, Delhi Police has not officially confirmed that the shell shown in the viral photographs was used during the recent protest, nor has it issued a statement confirming or denying the allegation regarding the expiry date.
Experts note that tear gas munitions are manufactured with recommended storage and service-life specifications. The printed expiry date generally indicates the period during which the manufacturer guarantees optimal performance under prescribed storage conditions. Whether an expired shell becomes unsafe or simply less effective depends on the specific type of munition and the manufacturer's technical guidelines.
Security analysts say that if an expired tear gas shell is found to have been used, authorities would likely need to determine whether it remained within operational safety standards, whether it had undergone periodic inspection and whether its deployment complied with established police procedures. Such questions can only be answered through an official investigation.
The controversy comes at a time when police action during the student protests is already under intense public and political scrutiny. Opposition leaders, student organisations and civil rights groups have demanded greater transparency regarding the crowd-control measures adopted during the demonstrations.
Meanwhile, supporters of the police have argued that conclusions should not be drawn solely from viral social media images. They say the authenticity of the photographs, the origin of the shell and whether it was actually fired during the protest must first be verified through official forensic examination.
As of now, no government agency, forensic laboratory or independent investigative authority has publicly confirmed that expired tear gas shells were used during the protest. The viral images remain part of an ongoing public controversy rather than an established fact.
The issue has nevertheless intensified calls for transparency in policing methods, with legal experts suggesting that any official inquiry should examine procurement records, storage logs and deployment details of crowd-control equipment used during the protest. Such an investigation, they say, would help determine the authenticity of the claims and address public concerns.
Until official findings are released, the allegation that expired tear gas shells were used remains unverified, and readers should distinguish between verified facts and claims circulating on social media.