The Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute in Kolkata has defended its decision to rusticate six students for a year, saying disciplinary proceedings were initiated over specific allegations of misconduct, including vandalism, defacement and physical assault, and not for their participation in protests.
The statement came a day after veteran actor Naseeruddin Shah expressed solidarity with the protesting students in a video posted on social media, triggering a fresh round of controversy around one of India's leading government-run film institutes.
"SRFTI clarifies that disciplinary action against certain students stems from specific acts of misconduct, including vandalism, defacement, and physical assault, not peaceful protest. The Institute upholds the right to peaceful dissent while ensuring accountability under its rules," the institute's statement read.
The institute, which operates under the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, said attempts to link the disciplinary action to the students' right to protest misrepresented the circumstances that led to the proceedings. Its intervention comes amid a prolonged confrontation between the administration and a section of students that has disrupted academic life for nearly a month.
Classes at the institute have remained suspended since September 28, and students have been staging a sit-in outside the office of Vice-Chancellor Santosh Ajmera since October 12, demanding his resignation over campus violence and raising concerns about security. The students allege that they were attacked on campus, and they have accused organisations linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh of involvement in those attacks.
According to the students, members of the Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat, an RSS-affiliated consumer awareness group, attacked them on September 27 during a programme at the institute. They also allege that they were targeted again on October 4 during a rally organised by the Bangiya Hindu Jagran Manch near the institute's entrance, when some protesters allegedly attempted to break open the gate after being stopped by police.
In his video message, Shah accused the Bharatiya Janata Party of pursuing a vendetta against those who do not subscribe to its beliefs and policies, following what he described as its victory in the West Bengal elections.
"The latest victims of this vendetta are the students, the aspiring filmmakers of the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute," he said, describing the students as victims and alleging that the party was either hoping to brainwash or frighten future filmmakers of the country.
"I can promise you that is not going to happen," the actor added. Filmmaker Payal Kapadia, whose film All We Imagine as Light won the Grand Prix at the 2024 Cannes Film Festival, also expressed solidarity with the students, saying she was absolutely horrified by the developments at the institute.
Shah further alleged that students had received show-cause notices, faced surveillance and threats, and been asked to vacate their hostels after demanding accountability from the administration. In a notice issued on October 16, the institute suspended regular academic activities in its film and electronic and digital media departments until November 13, and asked students to vacate the premises within 24 hours.
The actor's intervention drew a sharp response from the BJP.
Party MP and spokesperson Rahul Sinha called for a full investigation into Shah's comments and alleged that they could be linked to an international conspiracy, questioning the actor's motives and suggesting that he had emerged from a long period of inactivity to join a broader conspiracy involving foreign forces and opposition parties, including the Congress, the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M), to undermine democracy.
Sources critical of Shah went further, saying the actor was blatantly lying and further inflaming passions in a way that could harm the students and jeopardise their future. They argued that he was not a stakeholder in the dispute and had nothing to lose, while the students had their academic careers at stake.
An institute report cited in the coverage said the administration's recent measures were taken to protect the safety, dignity and academic future of its more than 500 students. It also said a section of students had opposed the installation of CCTV cameras meant to strengthen security, raising questions about their interests and compromising the safety of the whole institute community.
The dispute has also been coloured by the alleged assault on Vice-Chancellor Ajmera, an incident that the administration and its supporters have cited as evidence that the protests crossed the line from peaceful dissent into violence. The students, for their part, maintain that they are the victims of violence, not its perpetrators, and that the disciplinary action against them is retaliation for their protest.
That contest over who is victim and who is aggressor lies at the heart of the SRFTI standoff. Both sides agree that the campus has witnessed ugly confrontations; they disagree fundamentally about who started them, who sustained them, and whether the institute's response has been proportionate.
For an institution named after Satyajit Ray, arguably India's most revered filmmaker, the spectacle of suspended classes, sit-ins, rustication orders and duelling public statements is deeply damaging. Film institutes depend on an atmosphere of creative freedom and open debate, and a prolonged shutdown threatens the education of hundreds of students who had no part in the confrontations.
The involvement of nationally known cultural figures such as Shah and Kapadia has ensured that the dispute will not remain a local campus matter. Their solidarity has amplified the students' cause, but it has also drawn the institute deeper into the partisan politics that both sides accuse each other of importing onto the campus.
What happens next is uncertain. The students continue to demand Ajmera's resignation, the institute insists its disciplinary process is about misconduct rather than protest, and the political argument around the episode grows louder by the day. Until the two sides find a way back to dialogue, SRFTI's classrooms are likely to remain empty, and its students caught between a protest they believe in and an academic future they cannot afford to lose.
The episode has also reignited debate about the role of cultural figures in campus disputes. Supporters of the students argue that prominent voices can protect young protesters from institutional power, while critics contend that outside intervention hardens positions and makes compromise more difficult. Either way, the SRFTI row has now acquired a national audience, and any resolution will be judged far beyond the institute's gates.
(Reporting based on NDTV and Mathrubhumi.)