The episode has again placed JNU at the centre of a wider debate on free speech, dissent, and the unequal way campus voices are treated
NEW DELHI — Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has asked Delhi Police to register an FIR against students after slogans were raised against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah during a late Monday night gathering on the campus.
The university administration said the slogans were “provocative, inflammatory and insulting to the Supreme Court of India”. The request followed a programme held at Sabarmati Hostel, hours after the Supreme Court denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 North-east Delhi violence case.
JNU Chief Security Officer Naveen Yadav wrote to the Station House Officer of Vasant Kunj police station seeking legal action. “During the programme, after the court’s verdict on the bail appeals of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, the nature and tone of the student gathering changed significantly,” Yadav said. “Some students started raising highly unacceptable slogans. This is a direct insult to the highest court of India.”
In his letter, Yadav added: “Raising such slogans is completely contrary to democratic dissent, violates the JNU code of conduct, and is likely to disturb campus harmony and safety.” He said the act showed “deliberate and conscious misconduct”.
Students’ groups, however, rejected the administration’s charge and said the protest was political in nature. The event was organised as “A Night of Resistance” to mark six years since the January 5, 2020 campus violence, when masked attackers assaulted students and teachers inside hostels.
The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) said the gathering was part of the annual remembrance of what it called a Hindutva attack on the campus. “All the slogans raised during the protest were ideological and were not a personal attack on anyone,” JNUSU president Aditi Mishra was quoted by Press Trust of India (PTI) as saying:
Many students pointed out that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam have spent years in jail without trial. “You may disagree with us, but you cannot deny our right to speak,” a student participant said. “When Muslim students raise questions about justice, the answer cannot always be police cases.”
Political reactions were sharp. Union Minister of Textile Giriraj Singh said those involved should face sedition charges. Delhi ministers Ashish Sood and Manjinder Singh Sirsa condemned the protest and accused opposition parties of backing such actions. Sood referred to past statements attributed to Khalid and Imam and said sympathy was being shown “for political reasons”.
Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit took a different view. “People have the right to protest against court verdicts,” he said, while adding, “You can criticise people, but there is a way and a style to it.”
On Monday, the Supreme Court refused bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, stating that their alleged role placed them at a high level of conspiracy in the 2020 violence. At the same time, the court granted conditional bail to five other anti-CAA activists in the same case.
For many on campus, the protest reopened old wounds from January 5, 2020, when at least 28 people were injured, including then JNUSU president Ayush Ghosh. The Delhi Police faced strong criticism then for failing to stop the attack or identify the masked assailants.
“Students remember that no FIRs moved fast when we were beaten in our hostels,” another student said. “Now, when slogans are raised after Muslim undertrials are denied bail, the system reacts at once.”
As the police consider the university’s request, the episode has again placed JNU at the centre of a wider debate on free speech, dissent, and the unequal way campus voices—especially those of Indian Muslims—are treated in today’s political climate.
