Jamia’s Answer to Student Protest: Online exams, hostel closures and police detentions

As the hunger strike enters its third week, students allege that the administration is using disciplinary action and restrictions on campus life to weaken a movement demanding elected representation
Image: Rushikesh More / PTI

Jamia Millia Islamia’s administration has responded to a student movement demanding democratic representation by extending the suspension of physical academic activities, shifting examinations online and preparing to close hostels, intensifying a confrontation that has continued since October 12. As students remain on hunger strike over the restoration of the university’s elected students’ union, the administration’s latest measures have placed the burden of the standoff on the very students whose demand for representation remains unresolved.

On Wednesday, October 28, the university announced that online teaching for the current semester would continue until November 24, with practical examinations, fieldwork and project vivas scheduled online from November 25 to 30, followed by online theory examinations from December 1 to 24. Winter vacation will run from December 25 to January 12, with physical classes for the even semester scheduled to resume on January 13, 2027.

 

The announcement came as girls residing in Jamia’s BHM hostel marched inside Gate No. 8 on the night of October 28. The hostel provost reportedly warned them of disciplinary action if they did not end the march. Hostel residents were also asked to vacate all hostels by November 1, with the administration citing the shift to online classes.

 

The order means students will remain away from physical classrooms for the rest of the current semester and throughout the examination period, with no scheduled return to campus before January. The university has justified the decision on security grounds, but the timing and scale of the restrictions raise serious questions about whether the administration is responding to the concerns of its students or attempting to contain a protest it has been unable to resolve through a credible, time-bound commitment to elections.

 

 

 

 

In its order, the university said a meeting of deans, heads of departments, directors and other officials had concluded that the campus situation was “not conducive for academic environment”. It said the decision had been taken to ensure the safety and security of students.

 

 

Yet the administration has offered no electoral timeline that resolves the principal objection raised by the protesters. Instead, physical academic life has been suspended, access to campus facilities has been restricted, hostel residents face eviction and police action against protesters has continued. Students have argued that these measures punish the wider university community for a dispute that the administration could address by committing to a transparent and enforceable election schedule.

Twenty years without a union, and still no firm election date

At the centre of the agitation is a demand that should not require weeks of hunger strikes and escalating confrontation to secure: the restoration of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students’ Union (JMI-SU), which has remained defunct since 2006. The last elected union was dissolved amid allegations of campus violence and disruption. Two decades later, students continue to be denied a university-wide elected body through which they can represent their interests, raise grievances collectively and hold the administration accountable.

The current agitation began on October 12, when students launched an indefinite hunger strike demanding the revival of the union. The movement grew as students from different departments joined sit-in demonstrations around the Mirza Ghalib statue lawns. Five students were still on hunger strike on Wednesday, according to reports, despite the physical strain of prolonged fasting and the growing restrictions around the protest.

Students have repeatedly said that they exhausted conventional channels, including memorandums and representations to the university, before resorting to a hunger strike. Their grievances extend beyond the election schedule to include alleged administrative retaliation against students who protest, the withdrawal of disciplinary penalties and accountability for the conduct of campus security personnel.

In an account of the agitation, Indian Express reported, one hunger-striking student described the absence of an elected union as a structural problem that leaves students without an effective mechanism to challenge decisions affecting their education and campus life. The student cited previous protests over alleged irregularities in sports admissions and complaints about food quality at the Jammu and Kashmir hostel, claiming that students who raised concerns had faced campus bans or eviction.

 

The account points to a broader concern: when the administration controls the channels through which grievances are heard, while students lack an elected body to represent them, dissent can become an individual act of risk rather than an institutional process of accountability.

 

An election assurance tied to an approval process with no deadline

The administration announced on October 26 that student union elections would be held 15 days after the union constitution was approved. It also stated that suspension and show-cause notices issued during the agitation would be revoked and that a committee would investigate the conduct of security personnel during the protest. The announcement was presented as a step towards resolving the impasse. Students, however, rejected it as inadequate because the university did not specify when the constitution would be completed and approved.

An assurance that elections will take place 15 days after approval is not a definite election schedule when the date of approval itself remains uncertain. Without a binding deadline for the constitutional process, the administration retains control over when the condition for holding elections will be met.

Students have warned that this arrangement leaves room for further delay, allowing the university to claim that it has agreed to elections while postponing the process needed to make them possible. They have demanded that the constitution be drafted and approved within a short, fixed period and that the election dates be formally notified within 15 days of approval.

Students have also questioned why the administration needs an extended period to prepare a constitution when the university previously had an elected union. They have suggested that the existing constitutional framework could be reviewed and amended rather than used as a reason for prolonged uncertainty.

The administration’s announcement also failed to address the full range of disciplinary penalties imposed during the protest. While it referred to the withdrawal of suspension and show-cause notices, students pointed out that this did not explicitly cover rustication and campus bans. Ebin Basil was rusticated for one academic year, while Jasim Ali Khan was barred from entering the campus for six months, according to reports.

The detailed piece may be read here and here.

From campus restrictions to an extended academic shutdown

The latest order follows a series of measures that have progressively disrupted ordinary university life since the agitation began. On October 17, students alleged that university security personnel, accompanied by police, moved against protesters in the early morning, dragging and assaulting students and dismantling parts of the protest site. Videos circulated on social media showed confrontations and students being pulled away. Ebin Basil also alleged that he had been assaulted.

The administration has disputed aspects of the protesters’ account and accused students of obstructing university activities. On October 18, it condemned slogans painted on campus walls, including “Restore JMISU”, “Reclaim Jamia”, “Free Palestine”, “Free Sharjeel Imam” and “RSS Se Azaadi”, describing them as detrimental to national integrity, security and sovereignty. It also directed that the walls be repainted and called on protesters to vacate the demonstration site.

The university subsequently shifted classes online, citing disruption and security concerns. On October 24, it further restricted physical academic activity, closed gates and limited access to facilities, including the Central Library and canteen services. Students alleged that electricity and water supplies around the protest area were also cut off.

According to accounts published by Alt News and The Wire, protesters said their sit-in site had been dismantled, students had been manhandled and access to basic amenities had been restricted. Some students alleged that they were left with inadequate access to washrooms during the protest.

 

Students also reported that gates connecting parts of the campus and the boys’ hostels had been sealed. They said the restrictions affected not only those participating in the agitation but also students attempting to use university facilities and members of the public accessing services such as the health centre, dental hospital, bank, Aadhaar centre and post office.

 

Police deployment and detentions deepen the confrontation

The university’s restrictions have coincided with an intensified police presence around the campus. Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) has been invoked to prohibit public gatherings in the area, and warning signs outside the campus have threatened the use of force and legal action to disperse unlawful assemblies.

On Wednesday, Delhi Police detained two members of the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI), Faizan and Zishan, outside Gate No. 4. According to The Hindu, the two were taken to Fatehpur Beri before being brought to Jamia Nagar police station. NSUI condemned the detentions, which came as the students’ hunger strike entered its 17th day.

 

Students have alleged that more than 70 protesters have been detained since October 12. Earlier, Niranjan KS, Arbaaj Khan and Munna Qureshi were arrested under provisions of the BNSS and sent to judicial custody, according to media reports.

 

The police restrictions have also made the campus an increasingly difficult place for students to access and organise within. Protesters have described barricades, heavy deployment outside the gates and difficulties entering or leaving the university. Some have alleged that deliveries of drinking water and other essentials were stopped at the gates.

 

The situation also carries painful memories of the December 2019 police crackdown on Jamia students protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. The circumstances of the current agitation are different, but the renewed presence of police around a university campus, alongside allegations of force against students, has revived concerns about the treatment of dissent at an institution that has previously been at the centre of national debates over civil liberties.

Administration alleges vandalism; students accuse it of discrediting the protest

The latest escalation followed allegations of vandalism on the night of October 27. In a statement reported by the media, the university said groups of protesting students and local residents had damaged gates and boundary walls, brought down Gate No. 4C, pelted stones and damaged the CCTV control room, cameras and their connections. It also alleged that masked protesters had attempted to mobilise support from the boys’ hostels and that female wardens and faculty members had been threatened.

Students have denied the university’s account and accused the administration of attempting to frame the agitation. One protester, Neville Thomas, alleged that the administration had erected aluminium sheets around parts of the campus and subsequently blamed students when the structures were damaged. Students have also alleged harassment by proctorial staff in the hostels, including the confiscation of identity cards and orders to close mess facilities from November 1.

Hostels face closure as students continue their protest

The reported decision to ask hostel residents to vacate by November 1 marks another escalation. The university has argued that keeping hostels open serves little practical purpose when classes have moved online and teachers are not attending campus. An official also alleged that a large proportion of protesters supporting vandalism were hostel residents.

For students from outside Delhi, hostel accommodation is not simply an extension of classroom attendance. It is their place of residence, and abrupt closure can create serious logistical and financial difficulties. The reported march by women residents of the BHM hostel on October 28, followed by a warning of disciplinary action from the provost, underscores the growing strain between students and the administration.

Union Education Minister Pralhad Joshi has said that negotiations are continuing and appealed to students not to create a law-and-order situation. He stated that the concerns raised by students were being examined by a body constituted for the purpose. But an appeal for order does not answer the question at the heart of the protest. Students are asking when their elected union will be restored, what timeline will govern the drafting and approval of its constitution, and whether the administration will withdraw the disciplinary measures imposed during the agitation.

 

Related:

Books Under Siege: Bengal’s Left bookstalls, the Calcutta High Court’s intervention and the warning from Hitler’s Germany

Seeking justice for Ankita Bhandari, parents detained in pre-dawn crackdown at India Gate

Mumbai Police detain Ambedkarite leaders demanding justice for Sahil Wakode; IIT Bombay refuses to hear delegation

Calcutta High Court says political dissent must not be stifled, directs police to protect CPI(M) bookstall near Durga Puja Pandal

 

Trending

IN FOCUS

Related Articles

ALL STORIES

ALL STORIES