Popular media like Enemy At The Gates, Call of Duty and Company of Heroes are not the best source for nuance on WW2.

The short answer is no, not really, almost never. Rifles were one of the things the Soviet armed forces were not lacking for during WW2- this being relative to things like aircraft, which took a beating in Barbarossa to the point that about 1/5th of the Soviet airforce at the end of WW2 was made in the US or Britain, or something like light vehicles and trucks, which were commonly produced in Detroit- and at a logistical level begs a lot of questions.

Like how soldiers would be getting to a fairly established front without any sort of rifle, and how a superior officer would be ordering them to charge at- say- machine guns and not end up getting thrown in the gulag themselves for wasting lives like that.

This ends up in the same category of things that the Soviet army had to do, but didn't happen terribly often, like Soviet troops being mowed down by Soviet soldiers for not blindly charging at the enemy (This never happened, such orders weren't given, such individuals who simply refused to fight were punished and usually ended up in another role or in some cases executed) or Soviet tankers ramming enemy targets with their tanks (something to the tune of 30 or 40 recorded examples of it, typically against tanks of an equal or lower weight class, and crew operated weapons like machine guns or AT guns.)

I'm having a hard time finding a link for it but the one example I can think of where something like this happened involved workers in Stalingrad- not soldiers- who were armed, just not with firearms.