New Delhi, March 28: The Centre has informed Parliament that security forces may resort to pellet guns to quell protesters in Kashmir if other alternatives like chilli grenades and teargas shells fail.

The stand became public a day after the Supreme Court prodded the government to come out with alternatives to the much-criticised pellet guns that have left a dozen people dead and over 300-odd blinded in at least one eye during last year's unrest.

Junior home minister Hansraj Gangaram Ahir told the Lok Sabha in a written reply today that the government had set up a committee of experts on July 26 last year to explore possible alternatives to pellet guns as non-lethal weapons. The panel has submitted its report, suggesting pellets should be used in "extreme" situations and the targets hit only below the waist.

"Accordingly, the government has decided that the security forces will resort to various measures such as using PAVA (chilli grenade), stun grenades and tear-smoke shells to disperse rioters. However, if these measures prove ineffective in dispersing rioters, use of pellet guns may be resorted to," Ahir said.

The minister was replying to a question from AIADMK MP K. Ashok Kumar, who asked whether the government was planning to review the use of non-lethal weapons used by security forces as scores of people had lost their vision because of pellet shots in the Valley.

Sources in the ministry said the Central Reserve Police Force had started training its 60,000 personnel in Kashmir in the use of the less lethal munitions as soon as the committee submitted its report. The force was also given tips on handling protesters.

Paramilitary forces have procured less lethal munitions - chilli grenades, plastic shells, tear smoke, stun grenades, colour-smoke grenades, rubber bullets, dye-marker grenades with skin irritants, and multi-tier teargas launchers - from a BSF factory at Takenpur in Madhya Pradesh.

Hearing a PIL yesterday for a ban on the use of pellet guns during protests, Chief Justice J.S. Khehar had urged the Centre to explore alternatives: "It's a serious issue. It concerns the life and death of people. There is no question of our saying what weapons to use but a situation has arisen where we need to do something. We are a welfare state. We are of the impression there are other methods that can be adopted."