Activists such as Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid continue to face scrutiny because of their Muslim identity, a student tells at an APCR panel discussion
NEW DELHI — Alleging that peaceful demonstrators were subjected to prolonged interrogations and intrusive questioning unrelated to the NEET paper leak protests in Goa, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) has raised concerns over the intimidation and harassment of student activists.
The allegations were raised during an online panel discussion organised by APCR on Tuesday. It was titled “From Solidarity to Persecution: Standing with Goa’s NEET Activists”.
According to the organisation, several students who helped organise protests demanding accountability over the NEET examination were summoned to police stations in Mapusa and Panjim in late July. Participants at the discussion said that the questioning extended far beyond the stated purpose of the summons and appeared aimed at intimidating those who had taken part in the protests.
One of the organisers, Amreen, shared a detailed account of her interaction with the police, saying she had obtained all the necessary permissions before organising the protest.
She alleged that on July 26, she was called to Mapusa Police Station, where officers asked her to handwrite answers to nearly 240 questions during an interrogation that lasted several hours.
According to Amreen, she was summoned again to Panjim Police Station on July 29, where the questioning became increasingly personal. She alleged that police officers asked about her family’s financial background, whether any of her relatives had travelled abroad, and accused her of supporting student activist and former JNU researcher Umar Khalid.
She further said that officers asked whether she would “take accountability” if a bomb blast were to occur simply because she had organised the protest.
Amreen also said she was not allowed to have legal counsel present during the interrogation.
“We organised the protest for the fundamental right to education. I haven’t done anything unlawful, and I’m proud of what I have done,” she said.
Another speaker, student activist Sudeep Dalvi, spoke about his decision to stand in solidarity with Danish, a fellow protester who had travelled from Delhi to participate in the protest.
Dalvi said police questioned why he had chosen to associate with Danish and other activists.
“The police asked me why I was standing with these people. I stand with them because they are my colleagues,” he said.
Dalvi argued that activists such as Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid continue to face scrutiny because they are Muslims rather than because of any wrongdoing.
Sociologist Prof Nandini Sundar criticised the response to the protests, saying the treatment of the protesters reflected broader problems within the education system and democratic institutions.
She argued that the education system had become increasingly arbitrary and punitive and said the legitimacy of the students’ demands should never have been questioned.
“No one with any real sense of democracy would question the legitimacy of the protest itself,” she said.
‘The Protest Was Communalised’
Advocate Malisa described the police action as legally indefensible and alleged that authorities had sought to delegitimise the movement through defamatory narratives.
“What happened was preposterous. This was a protest that had already achieved accountability, yet it was converted into a campaign targeting individuals and communalised into a minority-versus-majority narrative,” she said.
The State is Afraid of Solidarity
Civil rights activist Anirban Bhattacharya argued that the police response reflected a wider fear of collective resistance.
“Simply holding a placard can lead to this. The regime is afraid of the youth, and especially afraid of solidarity,” he said.
Navsharan Singh linked the Goa developments to broader struggles for civil liberties across the country and renewed her call for a ban on the use of pellet guns during protests and conflict situations.
“Solidarity helps protestors negotiate better. Democratic space expands when different struggles are connected,” she said.
Concluding the discussion, APCR reiterated its demand for an immediate end to what it described as the intimidation of student activists in Goa. The organisation also sought accountability for the manner in which the interrogations were conducted, arguing that peaceful assembly and protest are rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
APCR affirmed its solidarity with the students and urged authorities to refrain from criminalising democratic dissent or targeting those who exercise their constitutional right to protest.
The Goa Police had not publicly responded to APCR’s allegations at the time of publication.
