Social Issues4 Nov 2026 · about 7 min

A month since tumult at Kolkata’s film institute, students firm on protesting till VC goes

The brief

The institute has been locked in a month-long student agitation since violence followed an RSS-affiliated programme on September 27. Students want accountability for injuries and attacks, the withdrawal of rustication orders against six students, the removal of police, and the restoration of hostel and mess services. They also want classes to resume under conditions they consider safe. Students are especially demanding Ajmera’s resignation because they say he has refused to meet them or listen to their demands. They also say students were attacked inside their residential campus. The administration counters that permission for the programme was granted before Ajmera took charge and that the protest has become a political and ideological battle driven partly by outside forces. The dispute has divided the campus sharply. Classes were suspended on October 16, students were asked to leave, and police were called after a torch procession. The confrontation shows how a single contested event became a struggle over safety, accountability, authority, and control of campus life.

What is happening at the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute, and why are students demanding that Vice-Chancellor Santosh Ajmera resign?

Students are especially demanding Ajmera’s resignation because they say he has refused to meet them or listen to their demands. They also say students were attacked inside their residential campus. The administration counters that permission for the programme was granted before Ajmera took charge and that the protest has become a political and ideological battle driven partly by outside forces.

The dispute has divided the campus sharply. Classes were suspended on October 16, students were asked to leave, and police were called after a torch procession. The confrontation shows how a single contested event became a struggle over safety, accountability, authority, and control of campus life.

What is a mashaal jaloos, and why did the administration view the students’ torch procession as a security threat?

A mashaal jaloos is a procession in which participants carry torches. At the institute, students held one across campus on October 27 to mark a month of agitation against Vice-Chancellor Santosh Ajmera. The procession ended with students carrying burning torches, making fire the central security concern.

A senior administrator, speaking anonymously, said the event was “scary” because staff feared someone might throw a mashaal at one of their quarters. That concern led the administration to call the police. A student rejected the claim as “silly,” insisting that the protest was peaceful and that no one intended violence.

The disagreement over the procession reflects the wider collapse of trust on campus. Administrators saw a possible threat to their homes, while students saw a peaceful political expression being treated as dangerous. Police have remained in and around the institute since October 27, deepening students’ concerns about surveillance and intimidation.

How large was the conflict: how many people were reported injured, how many students faced rustication, and how many police officers were said to be on campus?

The conflict caused substantial injuries and produced sharply disputed accounts of campus security. Reports after the September 27 scuffle said around 30 students and two faculty members were injured. Students later faced rustication orders, with six orders becoming a central demand for withdrawal.

The police presence is itself contested. Administration members put the number of personnel on campus since October 27 at “four or five.” Some students estimated the number at around 50. This gap is more than a counting disagreement: it shows how differently the two sides experience the same campus and how little they trust each other’s accounts.

The figures also show why the confrontation continued. Injuries created demands for accountability, rustication orders threatened students’ academic futures, and police presence changed everyday campus life. The article does not establish one definitive police count, but it makes clear that both sides saw the security response as significant.

What events on September 27 and October 4 turned a dispute over an RSS-affiliated programme into a prolonged confrontation?

The dispute began when the RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat hired an institute auditorium for a consumer-awareness programme. Students said organisers arrived early, walked around campus, and chanted Hindutva slogans. Students responded by making posters criticising the RSS and placing them in corridors and the auditorium. A video showed an organiser kicking a student, and the ensuing scuffle involved stones and bottles.

The September 27 violence injured around 30 students and two faculty members. Students then boycotted classes and demanded accountability. The administration stressed that permission for the programme had been granted before Ajmera became vice-chancellor, while students blamed him for refusing to engage with them afterward.

On October 4, members of Bangiya Hindu Jagaran Mancha threw bricks, stones, and bottles at students from outside the main gate. That evening, students gheraoed Ajmera in his office for around five hours and demanded his resignation. These events turned a disputed programme into a continuing institutional confrontation.

What consequences did the protests and violence have for classes, campus housing, hostel and mess facilities, police presence, and the six accused students?

The protests disrupted the institute’s academic and residential systems. Students boycotted classes after September 27, and classes were formally suspended on October 16. Students were also asked to vacate the campus. These decisions made the dispute affect not just demonstrations, but students’ education, housing, food, and daily routines.

Hostel and mess facilities were not operating, and students demanded that both resume. They also demanded that police leave the premises and hostel. The administration called police after the October 27 torch procession, and officers then remained in and around the campus. Students and administrators gave very different estimates of the police presence.

Six students faced rustication orders, another major source of tension. Students demanded their withdrawal along with Ajmera’s resignation and accountability for the violence. The article does not report a final settlement. For now, the campus remains shaped by suspended classes, disputed security measures, and unresolved disciplinary action.

Who are the main actors in the dispute—the students, the vice-chancellor, the institute administration, the police, and affiliated political groups—and what authority does each have?

The students are the main protesters. They can boycott classes, march, make demands, and challenge institutional decisions, but they do not control discipline or police deployment. Ajmera is the vice-chancellor and institutional head. He issues statements, represents the administration, and is the focus of students’ resignation demand, though permission for the disputed programme preceded his arrival.

The administration manages campus operations and called the police after the torch procession. It also suspended classes and asked students to vacate. The police have a security role and have stayed in and around the campus, but the article does not describe their legal authority in detail. Their presence is disputed by students.

Political and affiliated groups shaped the confrontation. The RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat hired the auditorium. Bangiya Hindu Jagaran Mancha later attacked students from outside the gate. Students also say external forces are being blamed unfairly. These overlapping roles turned institutional decisions into a broader political conflict.

What is academic freedom, and why do government-funded educational institutions often become sites of conflict over political influence, free expression, and control of campus life?

Academic freedom means that students and teachers can learn, teach, research, and debate ideas without political coercion or arbitrary punishment. It also depends on a campus having fair rules, open discussion, and protection from violence. When those conditions weaken, disputes over speech or events can quickly become disputes over who controls the institution.

The institute’s conflict shows this mechanism. An RSS-affiliated group was allowed to use an auditorium for a consumer-awareness programme. Students said Hindutva slogans were heard and responded with posters. A scuffle followed, then an outside group attacked students, while the administration brought in police and suspended classes. Each decision affected expression, safety, or access to campus life.

Government-funded institutions matter because public resources support spaces used by people with competing political views. The article presents a wider pattern, linking the institute’s turmoil to clashes at Jadavpur University and other educational institutions. Without accountability and dialogue, political influence can deepen mistrust and prolong disruption.

This brief was written by AI from the original reporting and checked by other models. Names, figures and quotes come from the source; read it for full context.