Political tensions have reignited on the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) campus in Delhi, sparking a national debate on free speech, protest, and judicial process. The flashpoint? The Supreme Court’s recent decision to deny bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots case. In response, a group of students took to the campus grounds, raising a series of controversial slogans against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah. The incident, now widely known as the JNU slogans row, has once again placed the university at the center of a fierce political storm .
Table of Contents
- The Trigger: SC Denies Bail to Activists
- What Happened on Campus: The JNU Slogans Row
- The 2020 Context: JNU Campus Violence
- Student Union Defense: Ideological or Personal?
- Legal and Political Fallout
- Free Speech vs. Hate Speech: The Fine Line
- Conclusion: A Campus at the Crossroads
- Sources
The Trigger: SC Denies Bail to Activists
The immediate catalyst for the protest was the Supreme Court’s rejection of bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Both have been in judicial custody since 2020, accused of being key conspirators in the larger “larger conspiracy” behind the communal riots that rocked parts of Delhi in February 2020, which left over 50 people dead . The Court’s decision, citing the seriousness of the charges under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), was seen by student groups as a blow to democratic dissent .
What Happened on Campus: The JNU Slogans Row
Following the court’s order, a gathering was organized by the university’s student union. During this event, protesters were heard shouting slogans that directly named Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Shah, accusing them of authoritarianism and suppressing political opposition . Videos of the event quickly went viral on social media, drawing sharp criticism from ruling party members who labeled the slogans as “anti-national” and “defamatory.”
This is the latest chapter in JNU’s long history of politically charged activism, which often draws national headlines. The campus has been a traditional stronghold for left-leaning student groups, frequently clashing with the central government’s policies.
The 2020 Context: JNU Campus Violence
To fully understand the current JNU slogans row, one must look back to January 5, 2020. On that day, a mob of masked individuals stormed the campus, attacking students and faculty, and vandalizing property. The violence was allegedly triggered by a protest against a hostel fee hike, but it quickly took on a political and communal dimension .
Umar Khalid, a former JNU student, was one of the prominent figures present during the events leading up to that attack. While he was not on campus during the violence itself, investigators allege his speeches and social media activity helped incite the larger conspiracy that culminated in the Delhi riots weeks later. His arrest and prolonged detention have since become a rallying point for various student and civil society groups.
Student Union Defense: Ideological or Personal?
Facing intense political backlash, the JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) president attempted to de-escalate the situation. He clarified that the slogans were not intended as personal attacks on the Prime Minister or Home Minister but were instead a form of “ideological expression” against what they perceive as the government’s policies of repression and majoritarianism .
“Our protest is against the idea of an authoritarian state, not against individuals,” the union president stated. This defense, however, has done little to quell the controversy, with critics arguing that naming individuals in hostile slogans crosses the line from political critique into personal vilification.
Legal and Political Fallout
The political fallout has been swift. Leaders from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have demanded strict action against the students involved, with some calling for sedition charges. Meanwhile, opposition parties have defended the students’ right to protest, framing the government’s response as an attempt to stifle legitimate dissent .
Legally, the situation is complex. While India’s Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), this right is not absolute. It can be restricted in the interest of public order, security, and sovereignty. The courts have often had to navigate this delicate balance, especially in cases involving university campuses.
Free Speech vs. Hate Speech: The Fine Line
This incident highlights the ongoing national debate about where to draw the line between free speech and hate speech. Universities like JNU are meant to be spaces for critical thinking and robust debate, often serving as a mirror to the nation’s political health. However, when protests involve language that is seen as inflammatory or inciting violence, they can quickly become a legal and social flashpoint.
For a deeper understanding of this legal tension, one can refer to the landmark judgment in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), where the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act for being overly broad and a threat to free speech . The case remains a cornerstone for free speech jurisprudence in India. For more on the history of student politics in India, see our feature on [INTERNAL_LINK:history of student movements in India].
Conclusion: A Campus at the Crossroads
The JNU slogans row is more than just a campus protest; it’s a microcosm of India’s larger political and ideological divide. On one side are those who see the students’ actions as a vital expression of democratic dissent in the face of perceived state overreach. On the other are those who view the slogans as an unacceptable attack on the nation’s highest elected officials. As the legal cases against Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam continue, the JNU campus remains a potent symbol of the ongoing struggle to define the boundaries of protest and free speech in modern India.