Umar Khalid verdict: JNU students voice dissent, raise slogans against PM, Shah

A wave of political fervor swept through the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) campus on Monday night, as students gathered to voice their dissent following the Supreme Court’s denial of bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in connection with the 2020 riots conspiracy case.

In the midst of the sprawling university grounds, slogans condemning Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah reverberated through the air, capturing the intensity of youthful protest and ideological expression.

According to a video circulating on social media, students raised slogans as part of what the JNU Students’ Union president, Aditi Mishra, described as an annual commemoration. “Every year, students hold a protest to condemn the violence which occurred on the campus on 5 January 2020,” Mishra explained. She insisted that the chants were rooted in ideology rather than personal attack, asserting that the protest sought to highlight broader issues rather than target individuals.

The memories of 5 January 2020, remain etched in the university’s collective consciousness. On that day, a mob of masked assailants stormed the campus, unleashing chaos across three hostels. Sticks, stones, and iron rods became instruments of terror as students were assaulted, windows shattered, furniture destroyed, and personal belongings vandalised. The mayhem lasted nearly two hours, leaving at least 28 injured — including the then JNU Students’ Union president, Aishe Ghosh.

The Delhi Police, criticised at the time for their perceived inaction, faced scrutiny for naming student leaders, including Ghosh, in two FIRs related to the vandalism. Yet, despite the intensity of the slogans on Monday night, a senior police officer confirmed that no complaints had been registered regarding the protest.

In the hallowed halls of JNU, where activism and academia have long intertwined, the protest served as a vivid reminder of the university’s enduring role as a crucible of political discourse, where memory, ideology, and youthful defiance converge in a resonant, if sometimes contentious, chorus.

With PTI inputs