Two Delhi University students remain hospitalised after the July 20 Jantar Mantar protest, as eyewitness accounts and medical findings draw attention to the injuries sustained.
Days after Delhi Police baton-charged thousands of demonstrators marching towards Parliament as part of the Cockroach Janta Party’s “Chalo Sansad” march, at least two Delhi University students remain hospitalised with serious injuries, raising questions about the extent of force used to disperse the July 20 protest. While Delhi Police have consistently denied using pellet guns, multiple eyewitnesses and medical reports have disputed that claim.
Sahil Lochab, a Delhi University School of Open Learning student preparing for the SSC Combined Graduate Level examination, may lose vision in his right eye after what his family alleges was a pellet gun injury sustained during the march. Lochab underwent surgeries at Lady Hardinge Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital before being shifted to the AIIMS Trauma Centre, where doctors reportedly removed a pellet lodged in his eye that had caused a corneal perforation, along with others from his lung and the tissue surrounding his heart. His family was initially told there was only a one per cent chance of his sight returning. Doctors have since said his prognosis remains “guarded”, meaning the likelihood of vision recovery remains uncertain.
Twenty-one-year-old Sakshi, also a Delhi University student, was caught in a crowd crush near Jantar Mantar after police allegedly pushed demonstrators into an already congested area following the use of tear gas, according to protesters. She was carried unconscious to a police vehicle after demonstrators alleged officers at the scene were reluctant to transport her to hospital. Admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at Ram Manohar Lohia (RML) Hospital and placed on ventilator support, she was extubated on July 23 after hospital authorities said her condition had shown “steady improvement”. They added that she was conscious, breathing independently, and that MRI scans of her brain and spine were normal.
Protesters on July 20 have described police charging at people who were simply filling water from a cooler, triggering a stampede. One eyewitness who was present when Sakshi was found unconscious, said her face had turned blue and that she was bleeding near one ear. Bystanders, guided by others in the crowd, attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and, when that appeared unsuccessful, administered mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. The witness also alleged that protesters restrained a police officer whom they believed was responsible for her injuries, and described difficulties in locating an ambulance before she was eventually taken to hospital in a police vehicle.
Delhi Police have said around 60 protesters and 118 police personnel were injured in the clashes. They also reported that more than 20 police vehicles were damaged and that 70 protesters were detained. Officers, including Head Constable Balram, Inspector Nand Kishore Singh, ACP Vivek Bhagat, and Head Constable Babu Lal, alleged they were separated from their units and assaulted by crowds.
Delhi Police have repeatedly and categorically denied using pellet guns during the protest, stating the force neither possesses nor uses them and warning against circulating “false and misleading” information. However, medico-legal case (MLC) reports for at least three injured protesters, including Lochab, 25-year-old Sheikh Irshad Mansoori, and a 28-year-old Outlook journalist, reportedly describe “suspected gunshot injury” or “pellet injury marks”, and hospital sources have said the pellets recovered were metallic rather than plastic or rubber. Pellet guns and shock batons form part of the Rapid Action Force’s (RAF) riot-control equipment. However, no official evidence has conclusively established whether pellet guns were fired during the protest.
Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, speaking to reporters in Parliament, accused the government of suppressing students’ voices and said the police action against them was “completely wrong,” renewing the Opposition’s demand for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to apologise and for Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan to resign.
Delhi University’s FYUP fourth year may not continue across all colleges after low student participation prompted principals to propose alternative implementation models for the research-based programme.
Delhi University’s optional fourth year under the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP) may no longer be offered across all affiliated colleges after low student participation raised concerns over the programme’s practical implementation.
According to reports, the Delhi University Principals’ Association (DUPA) has proposed that the fourth year be conducted only at designated colleges instead of every institution. The recommendation comes after only around 30% of eligible undergraduate students opted to continue into the fourth year during the previous academic session, leaving several colleges with very small batches that are difficult to accommodate academically and administratively.
In conversation with Times Of India, Delhi University Registrar Vikas Gupta commented that the University is positively considering the recommendation, adding that resources must be deployed judiciously where student strength is low. According to him, the final decision will be taken after the University receives complete enrolment data from colleges.
Introduced under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, the fourth year forms part of Delhi University’s Undergraduate Curriculum Framework (UGCF) 2022. Students who complete the additional year with a research dissertation are awarded an Honours with Research degree, intended to strengthen research opportunities and provide a pathway to doctoral studies. More information on the UGCF can be accessed on Delhi University’s official website.
College administrations have cited multiple challenges in implementing the programme with limited enrolment. Running specialised research courses for small groups requires adequate infrastructure, faculty members qualified to supervise dissertations, and sufficient academic resources. In many cases, these requirements become difficult to meet when only a handful of students remain in a department.
Gupta also clarified that if the proposal is implemented, students whose colleges are not designated to offer the fourth year would not have to formally migrate. Instead, they would attend classes at the identified cluster college offering the programme.
Student preferences have also contributed to the low participation. Many choose to graduate after three years to prepare for competitive examinations or pursue postgraduate studies elsewhere.
To address these concerns, principals have suggested a cluster-based model in which selected colleges would host fourth-year classes for students from multiple institutions. They have also proposed introducing minimum eligibility criteria to ensure that the research component remains academically rigorous. The proposal is yet to receive formal approval from the University. If implemented, it could significantly change how the fourth year of FYUP is offered across Delhi University’s affiliated colleges.
While protests at LSR continue for the removal of the Principal’s video featured on BJP’s official Instagram page, debates spark on institutional identity, political freedom, and the student’s right to dissent.
After the protests staged at LSR on the 15th of April over the Principal’s video on Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam being featured on the official Instagram page of the Bharatiya Janata Party came to an inconclusive end, the Principal, Dr. Kanika K. Ahuja issued an official statement to The Indian Express. She stated,
The views were shared in the video in an individual capacity. While I hold the office of the Principal, it is important to distinguish between personal intellectual engagement with a social subject and a formal institutional communique.”
Addressing the college’s reiterated commitment to maintaining the ‘apolitical’ stance, she said, “The college’s commitment to an apolitical environment refers to an absence of partisan affiliation not a detachment from critical social discourse.” She further addressed the alleged “saffronisation” on campus through selectively inviting speakers by adding,
The selection of speakers and the organisation of events are decentralised processes at LSR. These decisions are primarily driven by the respective student societies in consultation with their faculty advisors.”
These clarifications come in the wake of the student-led protest held on campus where students across departments and years organised sit-ins at the lower foyer—the immediate area outside the auditorium, adjacent to the Principal’s Office—along with the adjoining corridors, staircases, and outdoor spaces to raise concerns regarding the circulation of this video, which they believed to be in direct opposition to the college’s stated ‘apolitical’ stance that has been reiterated to close down exhibitions, refuse approval of speakers, and hinder free political expression on campus.
In a clarification issued by the students through a statement they refute accusations of being against the Women’s Reservation Bill. The statement published through an anonymous Instagram account reads, “Contrary to the disinformation at the moment—the students of LSR are not mobs protesting against the Women’s Reservation Bill which was talked about by Principal, Ms. Kanika K. Ahuja. The students are conducting a PEACE PROTEST at the moment against the hypocritical stance on apoliticality that our Principal uses to dismiss the girls when they attempt to talk about critical discourses, creative freedom…”. To the students of LSR who stress on their protest as peaceful—one that they reasserted with a floral arrangement reading “We Come in Peace” against the accusations of being a “mob” as asserted by a faculty member—their primary cause of dissent is the featuring of the Principal’s video where she is identified not in an individual capacity but as the Principal of Lady Shri Ram College on the official Instagram Page of BJP.
Image of the floral arranged shared by anonymous source.
While Ahuja reported to the Indian Express that, “I, staff advisors, faculty and others in the administration have remained in active dialogue with students to address campus concerns”, students report otherwise. During a brief interaction with students on the day of the protest, which multiple attendees reported as lasting less than fifteen minutes, Ahuja reportedly presented documents of communication and stated that the video was originally recorded for the Ministry of Women and Child Development but was uploaded by the BJP without her permission.
When asked if any actions had been taken to get the video removed, the students reported that no such action had been initiated, and that the Principal informed that gathering that she would “consider” sending an email for removal of the video. Similarly, on the second day of the sit-in, that is 16th April, she allegedly did not show up to the auditorium after her presence was requested by the protesting students, who complied with her initial request of an audience at the Auditorium instead of the Lower Foyer.
Following the protest on 15th April, which ended in the Principal walking-off in lieu of what she termed as “disrespect”, the administration of the college sent an email quoting a directive issued by the University of Delhi’s Proctor’s Office on March 23, 2026. The notice emphasised the need for prior approval from the concerned authorities for organising protests and demonstrations on the institution’s grounds. It further said that failing to comply with these requirements could result in disciplinary action, and asked students to follow the directive and continue attending classes.
Screenshot of Notification from LSR Administration.
Multiple students reported that the administration had been calling their guardians and parents to report their involvement in the protest, which they viewed as a clear violation of their rights. Additionally, the Students’ Union of Lady Shri Ram College of 2025-26 and 2026-27 issued a joint statement across liaison groups: they wrote,
We the Student Union of Lady Shri Ram College, wish to state unequivocally that we are not the organisers, convenors, or leaders of the protest currently taking place within the college premises…As elected representatives, our role is limited to facilitating communication and ensuring that the concerns of the students are conveyed appropriately to the relevant authorities.”
As news channels and social media pages continue a widespread reporting on the protest, the students of LSR involved in the sit-ins released a statement through the anonymous Instagram Page to “please represent the truth of our protest to the public so it doesn’t have the false narratives attached to it.” This request comes in light of multiple accounts on X accusing the protestors to be “Left-wing students (backed by terrorist org SFI) [who] not only made the Principal captive but also almost tried to lynch her and her daughter, just because she made a video supporting the women’s bill.”
Multiple such statements trying to relegate the protests to a political party have been actively refuted as the students’ demand remains the same—removal of the video, issuing a public clarification, avoiding external speakers on campus without proper background checks, ensuring all political engagements remain strictly non-partisan on campus, and ultimately reaffirming the institution’s commitment to secular and democratic values.
Multiple students have reported that during the first day of the protest, that is 15th March, a certain faculty member had been recording videos of the protesting students, many of whom were minors, without their consent. On informing the Principal regarding the same, including a case of alleged manhandling by the aforementioned Professor, the Principal reportedly stated that she would believe her colleague over the students in light of an adjacent incident which was brought up without the involved student’s consent. A deletion of such videos and photographs have been immediately demanded by the students, which the Principal reportedly agreed to.
Prominent public figures like Anish Gawande and Akhilesh Yadav have stepped up in support of the protesting students of Lady Shri Ram College; the former wrote on his Instagram story, “Very important clarification. You cannot demand that the students remain apolitical while the administration toes a political line.”
Screenshot of Anish Gawande’s Instagram Story
A student in conversation with DU Beat said,
We’re fighting to protect the ethos of our institution. What we’re seeing right now is a spread of convenient misinformation led by the principal, which is shaping a narrative against her own community, against her own students. That is unacceptable.”
This protest against the actions of Dr. Ahuja is however not the first incident of outrage by the student body of Lady Shri Ram College, but follows the sexist and Islamophobic comments passed by ex-diplomat Deepak Vohra in the presence of the Principal during an event organised within the college.
However, while the outrage continues, it is to be noted that while the online community of students supporting the protest remains at large numbers of 1000+ across multiple channels, on-campus limited students have actively engaged in the sit-ins. At the same time, student responses have been mixed; while a section of the students are concerned about institutional consistency and the larger implications of the Principal’s involvement on a particular party’s platform, others wholeheartedly welcome her stance. They emphasise an individual’s right to participate in public affairs, especially those involving women’s representation; a LinkedIn user from LSR writes,
“At the end of the day, she is not only our Principal but also an individual entitled to her own thoughts and opinions, just as each of us.”
On this, Principal Ahuja reported to Times Now, “Roughly 175 students participated in the protest out of around 4000 enrolled on campus. They do not represent the majority.” The separation of the personal from the political has at large remained the cause of support towards the Principal’s video, which claims to remain stationed only upon the Bill, and not upon the political party.
These recent developments across Delhi University and in particular within LSR, with respect to the conversations between the students and the administration during times of dissent, which remain inconclusive, point to a larger question of autonomy, authority, and hierarchy within college spaces, particularly on colleges that allege to be ‘apolitical’ but in practice remain otherwise. If to be or not to be [political] is the question, then the shaping of this incident, especially for a campus like LSR which has a long-standing history of intellectual inquiry, student engagement, and expression of free speech, shall determine the long-term implications of how college spaces are reconstructed, for both the students and the administrators.
After protesting and ultimately being granted permission for an artist at their college fest, Confluence 2026, Hansraj College witnessed a fight breaking out, creating chaos right before the artist’s performance began.
On 9th April, 2026, Hansraj College stepped into the final day of their fest, Confluence 2026, with an artist performance by singer Vilen marking the end of their 2-day celebration. However, right before the curtains drew to a close, a fight ensued, causing chaos, commotion, and the inevitable rumours of a larger catastrophe.
Spectators reported a brutal knife stabbing incident right before the artist’s performance began, with students of Hansraj College, and even outsiders, engaging in a fight with tables and chairs being thrown around. An unofficial students’ page of Delhi University alleged that the bricks used for construction in the renovation of the Gau Shalla were thrown around by the students, and one student’s head was injured as a result. However, the alleged stabbing incident has not been confirmed yet by any official reports.
Videos shared with the Editorial Team of DU Beat showcased individuals engaging in physical fights with one another, involving punching, kicking, and stomping on an unidentified individual near what has been identified as the C Block. Reportedly, the Art Society of Hansraj, Kalakriti, had to close down its stall as it was in the direct vicinity of the incident.
Similar fights were recorded where individuals were seen running out of the college hostel gates with one unidentified individual’s shirt being torn apart, tables being thrown at him, and ultimately, him being dragged out by a group of individuals.
A student from Jesus and Mary College attending the fest stated,
There was a fight but it was before Vilen came on stage. But the concert duration was only till 5 or 5:30 and they wrapped it up pretty quickly.”
Similarly, another student from Hansraj College added,
There was an unexpectedly large crowd at the event, which became difficult to manage, especially once the artist arrived. There were instances of people climbing barricades and a lot of pushing, making it hard to even stand, particularly in the front rows. The situation was also made worse due to the hot weather. Some of the disturbance had actually started even before the artist arrived, as we noticed groups of people rushing towards the hostel gate.”
The understaffing of security and poor management due to an unprecedented crowd have been highlighted across testimonies received by the Editorial Team.
Reports, including Instagram stories shared by members of the Hansraj Students’ Union and Students’ Council, hinted at a similar chaos unfolding on Day 1—the Secretary of Hansraj College shared an Instagram story with regard to the incidents of 8th April, captioned, “Guys kal please thoda civilised behave krlo” [Guys please behave civilised tomorrow].
In one video circulated on Instagram, police officers were also seen intervening amongst the fighting students. A first-year student from Hansraj College added,
The incident at the hostel gate was the most severe one. From the information that’s being circulated, the fight involved a group of students allegedly fighting over a girl, which required police being called to handle the situation.” The same student observed that most of the rights and acts of violence were initiated by non-Hansraj students who were thereafter escorted out of the campus.
Despite the chaos that ensued, videos have been widely circulated of the singer Vilen performing with a large audience cheering, dancing, and singing along. Many students added that the fest was successful, given the protests undertaken by the Hansraj Students’ Union and the college at large, with respect to obtaining artist permission from the administration.
In an exclusive conversation with the President of the Students’ Union of Hansraj College, Abhijit Singh, he added that the majority of chaos and fights were ensued by outsiders with the intent of lobbying. He stated,
“Throughout the whole night, me and the Union were awake securing barricades for safety arrangements, however, on the day of the fest the crowd exceeded expected capacity. We tried our best to help the students and the artist performance was thereafter conducted smoothly.”
Singh additionally criticised the failure in security management from the police and noted that budget allocations were abruptly changed and payments were held by the college administration. He further stated that the stabbing incident has not been officially reported to the Union and is likely a rumour, along with issuing a clarification regarding the fight at the hostel gate; he said,
The video showcasing the fight located at the Hostel Gate is in fact Gate No 5, which is also the entry gate to the college. No fight happened within the hostel and most of the violence and chaos was orchestrated by non-Hansraj students.”
Delhi University has announced a month-long ban on protests and public gatherings across campus, citing concerns over safety and public order.
The University of Delhi has imposed a temporary prohibition on protests, demonstrations, and public gatherings across its campuses for a period of one month, according to an official order issued by the Office of the Proctor on February 17, 2026.
The circular, addressed to students, faculty members, and staff, states that all forms of public meetings, processions, rallies, dharnas, and demonstrations are “strictly prohibited” within university premises with immediate effect. The restriction will remain in force until March 17, 2026, unless withdrawn earlier.
According to the order, the decision was taken following inputs suggesting that unrestricted gatherings on campus could lead to traffic obstruction, threats to human life, and disturbances to public peace. The Proctor’s Office noted that in previous instances, protest organizers had allegedly failed to manage crowds effectively, leading to escalation and deterioration of law and order within university spaces.
The directive also references an order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Civil Lines subdivision, under provisions linked to notifications by the Ministry of Home Affairs. These regulations extend the scope of restrictions to several specific activities.
Under the order, the assembly of five or more persons for protest-related purposes has been prohibited. The use or carrying of potentially hazardous materials, including mashals, beacons, or torches, has also been banned. Additionally, slogan shouting, public speeches, rallies, and any activity that could disrupt public tranquillity or impede the smooth flow of traffic are not permitted during the enforcement period.
University authorities justified the move as a preventive measure aimed at maintaining safety and ensuring normal academic functioning across campuses. The order emphasizes concerns over crowd management and the potential spread of unrest during large gatherings.
The circular has come into immediate effect from February 17, 2026, following approval from the competent authority, marking a significant temporary restriction on collective demonstrations within Delhi University campuses.
SFI Delhi condemns AUD’s expulsion of Comrade Nadia and the suspension of activists, calling it undemocratic repression; it demands reinstatement, a fair inquiry, and the protection of students’ rights and campus democracy.
The Delhi State Committee of the Students’ Federation of India (SFI) has strongly condemned the expulsion of one of its members, Comrade Nadia, from Dr. B. R. Ambedkar University Delhi (AUD) along with the suspension of five other student activists. The federation termed the action as an “undemocratic student repression” and vowed to fight against what it described as the stifling of dissent and student rights on campus.
The AUD administration expelled Comrade Nadia, while five other students—including SFI Delhi State Committee member Shefali, along with Shubhjeet, Ajay, Sharanya, and Keerthana—have been placed under prolonged suspension. The committee alleged that these punitive measures were being used to silence demands for a more student-friendly campus.
The statement read:
It seems that the AUD administration considers demanding a student-friendly campus and accessible education to be ‘crimes worthy of the highest punishment.’ What we are seeing in the case of Comrade Nadia’s expulsion, particularly, is just this.
The SFI argued that such incidents were part of a larger trend of repression in Delhi-based universities. “This pattern of student repression mirrors what the past few years have shown us in other Delhi-based campuses like JNU, JMI and DU,” the release noted, adding that governments led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had not hesitated to express “vindictiveness against students.”
Highlighting that protest has historically been integral to the democratic spirit of Indian universities, the student organisation warned that attempts to quash dissent would only invite greater resistance. It further informed that SFI Delhi had already approached the courts of law to challenge what it called the “arbitrary expulsion and suspension” of its activists.
The condemnation came on India’s 79th Independence Day, a date that the SFI said must remind the nation of its founding ideals. A day that calls for the reiteration of our country’s basic ideals; of “democracy, of justice, of liberty,” the committee stated, linking the students’ struggle to broader constitutional values.
The SFI has demanded that the AUD administration revoke Comrade Nadia’s expulsion and initiate a fair and transparent inquiry into the cases. It alleged that due process had not been followed and urged the administration to “see the light of reason and logic.”
AUD has been and shall remain a campus that fosters debate and discussion. If the Administration refuses to ensure this, we shall reclaim what is rightfully ours.
As of now, AUD authorities have not issued an official response to the allegations or clarified the reasons behind the disciplinary action.
The National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) launched a protest on 13th August at the Arts Faculty of Delhi University’s North Campus calling for 12 days of menstrual leave per semester for female students of DU. Using the slogan, ‘From Pain to Power,’ and imprinting nearby walls with red handprints, the protest gained traction from students across the DU circuit.
The demonstration, carrying out a signature campaign in furtherance of their advocacy, was held under police supervision.
“Every signature is a stand for dignity, equality, and the right of female students to rest without stigma,” NSUI had claimed via a post on their official Instagram account.
According to the student outfit, menstrual health significantly influences female students’ academic outcomes, mental well-being, and active involvement in campus life. They emphasised that neglecting this concern often leaves students with the difficult choice of missing classes, or they get bound to endure considerable discomfort merely to satisfy attendance criteria, not excluding other curricular commitments that they have.
NSUI urged Delhi University to formulate policies that accommodate female students’ plight in order to make campus more inclusive and gender sensitive. The organisation vowed to continue their efforts to urge educational institutions to implement multi-stakeholder policies.
Protests erupted on the campus of Kalinga Institute of Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, after the alleged suicide of a student from Nepal. Following the protests, the university dropped off Nepali students at various railway stations and asked them to return home.
On February 16, 2025, Prakriti Lamsal, a 20-year-old student of Kalinga Institute of Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, hailing from Nepal, was discovered hanging from the ceiling fan of her hostel room after alleged prolonged assault at the hands of a fellow student, now identified as Advik Shrivastava. She is alleged to have taken her own life while being on a video call with the accused. Following the incident, several Nepali students had blocked the road near the campus, alleging that the university took no action after the students reached out to the International Relations Office at the university. Police officials have claimed it to be a self-evident case of suicide, and Advik Shrivastava, the boy who allegedly played a role in the death of the student, has now been detained following his attempted escape from Bhubaneswar through flight. The student body has alleged that the victim had suffered continuous abuse at the hands of the detained. Her suicide note, which is now missing, and her phone, now in the custody of the administration, have all important and necessary information regarding it.
As of recently, a video has been circulating on social media featuring the college administration’s response to students from Nepal and their requests for a formal investigation to be launched, with one of the phrases used being, “Pack your bags and leave.”
Source: X
The KIIT management has passed an official order calling for hostels to restrict the movement of students with immediate effect, and students of Nepalese origin have been threatened and beaten into vacating the college premises after having met with hostilities following direct relation to the case. their protests. A notice issued by college authorities read:
The university is closed for all international students from Nepal. They are hereby directed to vacate the university campus today, February 17.
According to reports, on Monday, over 500 Nepali students were asked to board buses, dropped at various railway stations and requested to head home.
Further sources claim that students were allegedly forced to vacate the college campus.
No train tickets or any directions have been provided to us. We were just loaded up on the hostel buses, sent to Cuttack railway station, and ordered to leave for our homes at the earliest. The staff members entered the hostel, made us vacate, and even hit those who were not vacating quickly,” claimed a student from Nepal.
Many anonymous sources have gone on to claim that this was not an incident in isolation, and similar cases of racial discrimination against international students, as well as student suicides and gendered violence, have occurred and have subsequently been brushed under the rug by concerned authorities of the college.
Protests against the freedom fighter quota, having been sparked since the High Court judgement which declared the annulment of the 30 per cent quota illegal earlier this month, escalated on Sunday night. The government has declared a nation-wide curfew, the internet has been cut-off and the casualties stand at 105 currently. Professors at several universities across Bangladesh, mobilising the student protest groups, have called for fresh protests.
Up until 2018, the quotas maintained by the Bangladeshi government for its civil service jobs included the infamous freedom fighter quota, standing at 30 per cent. This quota reserved the seats of civil service posts for the children and grandchildren of the freedom fighters of the nation. Coupled with the other quotas, only 46 per cent of the jobs were left that could be contested on the basis of merit. In 2018, protests against the quotas rose and were subsequently quelled promptly by the government, which later decided to scrap all quotas, except the quota reserving seats for the freedom fighters’ posterity. A verdict regarding this was passed on July 7 by the High Court which declared the move as illegal.
In Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s address on July 14 to the protesting students, she has been recorded saying, “Why are the freedom fighters so resented by them? If the grandchildren of freedom fighters do not get jobs, do they encourage the razakars to get them? This is what I ask the nation.” The term razakar, a pejorative euphemism denoting conspirators against the nation during the Bangladeshi Liberation Movement of 1971, struck a grisly chord with the students who interpreted her address as an oblique comparison of the student protestors with razakars. They organised rallies, chanting “Tumi ke, ami ke, razakar, razakar” (Who are you, who am I, razakar, razakar), allegedly mocking the PM’s address.
The Bangladesh Chhatra League (Bangladesh Student League), the youth wing of the ruling party, alongside the police, attacked the protestors on July 5, leading to a bloodbath in public and private universities across the country. The government has announced its decision to deploy military forces, to curb the protests. No communication has been received from the ground on account of the nation-wide internet shut down. 105 people have died in midst of the protests and over 2500 have been injured so far. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), the primary opposition party, has joined hands with the protestors and claims to support their cause. On Friday, the police launched tear gas on the BNP protesters and arrested the party leader, Ruhul Kabir Rizvi. The Indian Railways has cancelled trains to Bangladesh. Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal claims that around 15,000 Indians including 8,500 students, are residing there. He further reports that they are all safe. Of the aforestated number, 450 students have been evacuated so far and returned via Agartala. Imtiaz Ahmed, former professor of Dhaka University’s political science department opines, “Hasina should have called for conference with the students instead of unleashing her trigger-happy police if she wanted to handle the situation better.”
As the country continues to grapple with intense protests and student casualties keep mounting, a burgeoning consensus against Hasina’s government condemns her methods – for being “autocratic”. “The public, alongside the cumulative effect of Hasina’s four-term anti-incumbency, also resents her autocratic way of handling dissent,” remarks former Bangladeshi diplomat and president of Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, Humayun Kabir.
Recent heavy rainfall in the capital on June 28 has exposed severe infrastructural issues, particularly at the Arts Faculty, where the reading room experienced significant water leakages and short circuits. Additionally, other esteemed educational institutes like IIT Delhi and AIIMS Delhi are also witnessing an equally miserable fate.
As Delhi University continues its yearly ritual of exorbitant fee hikes—110% in PhD courses and 40% in annual postgraduate courses—it is important to note that the condition in which DU students have to study remains deplorable. These problems clearly reflect the university’s incompetence and disregard for student safety.
The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) DU’s Instagram page, @sfiduspeaks, posted a reel highlighting the miserable state of one of India’s premier institutions. Captioned “Save Public Education! Save Delhi University! Fee Must Fall!”, the post called for immediate action from the university to address these infrastructural issues. SFI Vijay Nagar has also demanded urgent measures to fix these problems and ensure student safety, noting that the lack of basic amenities like air conditioning in classrooms becomes unbearable when temperatures in Delhi soar to 48 degrees Celsius. The third building, made with makeshift materials like tin roofs and asbestos-lined walls, exacerbates the heat issue, creating an uninhabitable learning environment.
Simran, from SFI DU, in a conversation with DU Beat, said, “Since there is no maintenance in these reading rooms at Arts Faculty, due to heavy rain, the ceiling started to leak and then a short circuit happened, and soon fire also occurred out of nowhere. The main problem is that despite increasing fees they are not improving infrastructure and maintenance at all.”
Additionally, a press release by SFI Delhi University, dated June 27, 2024, highlighted student protests against the fee hikes in postgraduate courses. Students criticized the apathetic Delhi University administration and the ABVP-led Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) for their silence on the rising education costs. It showcased how fee hikes place a heavy financial burden on students, undermining the principles of publicly funded education and limiting opportunities. Despite the fee hikes in previous academic years, there has been no corresponding improvement in infrastructure. Students of the well-known Law Faculty often find their campus without even a single functioning water cooler, all while bearing Delhi’s scorching heat.
In addition to Delhi University, other premier institutes in Delhi have also been severely affected by the heavy rainfall. AIIMS Delhi experienced similar issues with severe water leakage on June 28, highlighting the widespread infrastructural problems across top educational institutions in the city.
At IIT Delhi, a viral video showed a pillar collapsing in the placement cell building following the heavy rainfall. This incident led to the disconnection of electricity in some areas for safety reasons. An official email from the Institute Engineer detailed the flooding on campus and stated that maintenance teams are working to restore services. The email requested cooperation from the campus community and apologized for the inconvenience.
These incidents at Delhi University, AIIMS Delhi, and IIT Delhi highlight the urgent need for infrastructural changes and better maintenance protocols, it’s indeed high time that these educational institutes make upgrades to ensure the safety and well-being of their student body, who have come from faraway places in the country to study in “premier institutes” in the capital. Despite significant fee hikes, these institutions have failed to invest adequately in their infrastructure, leading to dangerous and unacceptable learning conditions. As students and stakeholders wonder, “Where is our money going?”, they are now demanding accountability and immediate improvements to their educational environments.
