Latest news with #HaryanaStateWomen'sCommission
The Hindu
20-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Criminalising Thought: How Indian Universities Are Abandoning Academic Freedom
Published : May 20, 2025 16:21 IST - 9 MINS READ Wilhelm von Humboldt, a great liberal reformer and a humanist, once defined the university as 'nothing other than the spiritual life of those human beings who are moved by external leisure or internal pressures toward learning and research'. Even if a university did not exist, Humboldt felt that a human being would otherwise 'privately reflect and collect, another might join with men of his own age, a third might find a circle of disciples. Such is the picture to which the state must remain faithful if it wishes to give an institutional form to such indefinite and rather accidental human operations'. This classic Humboldtian assertion about what a 'university' may symbolise—or ought to actualise—for people of any given generation remains profoundly relevant today. A similar idea was revisited in 1969 by public intellectual Noam Chomsky during a period of profound uncertainty and crisis in America's educational landscape, when student-led activism across campuses compelled universities and the intellectual elite to reflect on their role and to reimagine their place in society—even in terms of institutional propriety. Today, once again, universities and colleges across the globe find themselves at a critical juncture, amid a global lurch toward right-wing extremism and an ideologically driven, majoritarian assertion of the state. This moment represents not just an impasse, but a deep crisis—one that goes well beyond the economic, technical, or administrative upheavals typically associated with issues of access or resources. Far more troubling is what the recent arrest of a professor reveals: that Indian universities are in the grip of a deeper learning crisis—one in which the very foundations of our 'constitutional values' and 'constitutional morality' are barely visible, if present at all. On May 19, Dr. Ali Khan Mahmudabad, who heads the department of political science at Ashoka University in Haryana, was arrested over a social media post. There is nothing in the post that could, by any juridical standard, justify such an action—and yet, the arrest was carried out. In any functioning democracy that respects its constitutional principles, the nature of arrest or juridical process, which is its own form of punishment in the Indian public institutional experience, calls for public outrage and institutional alarm. Even in the daily churn of detentions, FIRs, and censorship orders—the theatre of majoritarian assertion enacted through extreme state power—the extreme frivolity of the complaints against Mahmudabad has come as a shock. His institution has distanced itself from the case, but his students and colleagues have supported him to the hilt, including by standing vigil at the police lock-up. Social media has erupted in protest and at least one television channel exposed the absurdity of the charges through an interview with Renu Bhatia, the chairperson of Haryana State Women's Commission who filed the police complaint against Mahmudabad. Also Read | G.N. Saibaba reveals torture and injustice during 10-year imprisonment The story here is not only about the arrest, but also what it signals. Mahmudabad's post was not in any way advocating insurrection. It acknowledged the strategic achievements of Operation Sindoor and praised the symbolism of women leading the military briefing. His post posed a question—measured and reflective—about symbolism alone in the absence of substantive justice for India's minorities. It was not a provocation, nor was it partisan. It was the work of a public intellectual engaging with the moment. However, the state chose to respond not with debate or critical deliberation but with an FIR. Suddenly, the post and the question it asked became a threat and the thought it raised became a liability. The arrest marks what academics might call an epistemic rupture, a point at which power demands that knowledge retreat and where knowledge is punished for resisting. For me, the issue is simple, in the context of the arrest, how did the university concerned have nothing to say or offer in support of its own faculty? Ashoka University did not defend the right to expression. It did not invoke the autonomy of scholarship. It did not uphold its duty to protect inquiry. It did not even ask for a fair hearing. This silence is not just loud. It is also instructive. What is important to remember here is that this is not a misstep. It is a pattern. Across borders, the university, as a space and institution, is being recast, not as a site of contestation but as a risk-managed domain of reputation and restraint. In Thailand, American scholar Paul Chambers was arrested over his remote association with a webinar deemed offensive. He had not spoken or organised it. Still, he was charged. In the US, Georgetown professor Badar Khan Suri was detained by Homeland Security on immigration grounds shortly after publishing critical research. Neither case involved speech that was unlawful. Both involved speech that was inconvenient. The Indian university, however, is at a sharper inflection point. It is not simply adapting to political pressure. It is retreating from its role altogether. It no longer mediates between state and society. It no longer affirms the legitimacy of dissent. It no longer distinguishes between critique and criminality. In this vacuum, students watch as their teachers weigh each word, delay each paper, dilute each thought. The institutional memory of the university, once passed through debate and disagreement, is now being rewritten in silences. As the scholar James Yoonil Auh observes, universities today face a 'quintilemma', a five-fold crisis eroding the foundations of higher learning. Truth is politicised. Autonomy is fragile. Belonging is conditional. Survival is transactional. And purpose, perhaps most dangerously, is adrift. The arrest of Mahmudabad, and the institutional silence that followed, touches all five. What does this teach students? They are urged to think critically but only within sanctioned boundaries. To speak freely, but never too loudly. To analyse, but not antagonise. This is a contradiction at the heart of modern academia, one that demands boldness and punishes it in the same breath. Yet the university, at its conception, was never meant to serve consensus. It was designed to disturb it. It was not built to affirm power but to question it. The earliest universities were sanctuaries for thought deemed too unruly for the court or the church. They existed not to mirror the world as it is, but to imagine what it could be. That architecture, intellectual, civic, moral, is now under siege. Nor is this erosion confined to India. In the UK, the Public Order Act has drawn sharp criticism for curbing student protests under the guise of public safety. In Hungary, entire gender studies departments have been dismantled through state defunding. In the US, 'anti-woke' legislation increasingly dictates the permissible contours of race, gender, and history education in public institutions. The global university is becoming less a site of inquiry and more a stage for ideological compliance. Highlights In 2021, Dr Pratap Bhanu Mehta, one of India's most respected political theorists, was forced to resign from Ashoka University. Economist Arvind Subramanian resigned in protest soon after. Their departures sparked student outrage and drew global condemnation. In 2023, economists Sabyasachi Das and Pulapre Balakrishnan left Ashoka University amid institutional discomfort with Das' research. In this landscape, what does it mean to teach in India today? To learn? What does it mean to enter a classroom knowing that a question, however measured, however thoughtful, may be interpreted not as dialogue but as defiance? What does it mean when students must calculate not only what they think, but how safely it can be expressed? The quiet assertion by Mahmudabad reminded us that India's pluralism is not extinguished. It appears, briefly and brilliantly, in moments like a military briefing led by women, or a question raised in good faith. But a pluralism glimpsed is not a pluralism guaranteed. The real challenge is not to celebrate its performance on national stages but to defend its presence in libraries, lecture halls, and living memory. In the long run, it is not one arrest or one post that will define a republic. It is the ambient fear that settles into place afterwards, the kind that does not silence outright, but teaches people to pre-empt their own silence. The greater risk therefore lies not in censorship but in the habit of self-erasure. And this is not the first time. Indian academics have for long found themselves marked, maligned, and made examples of, for asking the wrong questions, publishing the inconvenient paper, standing by the unpopular view. The targets shift. The tactics evolve. But the pattern endures. What we are witnessing is not an isolated aberration but the escalation of a longer campaign, one that demands our immediate and unflinching attention. The arrest of Mahmudabad for a reflective and measured social media post is in essence a continuation of a deepening crisis, where the space for thought is shrinking and the cost of asking a question can be criminalisation. The pattern is not new. In 2021, Dr Pratap Bhanu Mehta, one of India's most respected political theorists, was forced to resign from Ashoka University. His writings had become, in the words of the university's founders, a 'political liability'. Economist Arvind Subramanian resigned in protest soon after. Their departures sparked student outrage and drew global condemnation, with over 150 international scholars calling it a 'dangerous attack' on academic freedom. Mehta's exit was not a resignation. It was an eviction masked as discretion. Also Read | Prof Hany Babu's house raided again There are others. In 2016, Amit Sengupta resigned from the Indian Institute of Mass Communication after being abruptly transferred to a remote campus, a move he described as retaliation for supporting the protests that arose around Rohith Vemula's death. In 2023, economists Sabyasachi Das and Pulapre Balakrishnan left Ashoka University amid institutional discomfort with Das' research. The language of these repressions may vary—administrative reshuffling, legal harassment, subtle coercion—but the message remains constant: dissent will be punished, and inquiry will be policed. This is not just a problem for the university. It is a threat to the republic. Because when a professor is arrested not for inciting rebellion but for posing a question, what is being criminalised is not speech but thought itself. And when universities respond with silence, or worse, with complicity, what is lost is not just academic freedom, but the very idea of a university as a space of fearless inquiry. The consequences are already visible: classrooms grow quieter, students second-guess themselves, curricula bend toward the comfortable. What is being taught, implicitly, is not how to think, but how not to. If India is to preserve its pluralistic imagination and its constitutional morality, it must protect its scholars, not as agitators, but as stewards of the democratic conscience. The stakes are no longer theoretical. They are existential. Because once a society begins to punish its thinkers for thinking, it begins to forget how to think at all. Geetali and Ankur Singh from the Centre for New Economics Studies (CNES) contributed to this column. Deepanshu Mohan is Professor of Economics and Dean, O.P. Jindal Global University (JGU), Sonipat, Haryana. Aman Chain, Harshita Hari, and Najam Us Saqib of the Centre for New Economics Studies contributed to this article.
Hindustan Times
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Who is Renu Bhatia, woman behind the action against Ashoka University professor?
Renu Bhatia, the Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson, has played a central role in the arrest of Ali Khan Mahmudabad, the Ashoka University professor who stirred a row with a controversial post on the Operation Sindoor briefings. One of the complainants in the Ashoka University professor remark case, Bhatia, first summoned Mahmudabad over his social media post on Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh. Her complaint led to the professor's arrest and sparked a national debate. Mahmudabad, the head of the political science department at Ashoka University, was arrested on Sunday by Haryana Police at his residence in Delhi. He was remanded to two days of police custody after two FIRs were registered against him, including charges related to endangering India's sovereignty and promoting communal disharmony. Born in Srinagar, Bhatia belongs to a Punjabi-Kashmiri family that went through the mayhem of Kashmir's insurgency years. A staunch BJP loyalist, Bhatiya has almost four decades of political experience. She began her political career as a municipal councillor in Faridabad in the year 2000 and went on to become deputy mayor, her LinkedIn profile reads. Despite losing her 2010 election race, she continued to be a key name in Haryana politics. Also Read | Civil society backs Ashoka University prof with Lko-Mahmudabad connect Bhatia was appointed as the chairperson of the Haryana Women's Commission in January 2022. Her term until 2025 has been extended. Her commission has pursued cases aggressively involving women's rights, such as a large sexual harassment investigation in Jind district that involved more than 100 girls, as per media reports. Also Read | Supreme Court agrees to hear plea of Ashoka University professor against arrest In 2023, the commission also lodged an FIR against O P Jindal Global University professor Sameena Dalwai on charges of "outraging the modesty" of women students. It was Bhatia's suo motu action and subsequent complaint that triggered Mahmudabad's arrest. The professor, also a Samajwadi Party spokesperson, had posted comments questioning the use of women officers in government briefings related to Operation Sindoor, implying political optics. Also Read | What did arrested Ashoka University professor say about Operation Sindoor?
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Morning news wrap: 17 of family dead in Hyderabad blaze, Ashoka University professor arrested over Op Sindoor post & more
. A tragic fire in a 100-year-old building near Hyderabad's Charminar killed 17 members of a jeweller's family, including the family head and eight children, during a weekend gathering. In another development, two suspects were arrested in a joint Telangana-Andhra Pradesh operation for allegedly plotting bomb blasts and testing explosives. Former US President Joe Biden was diagnosed with prostate cancer, which has spread to his bones. India's decision to restrict imports of ready-made garments from Bangladesh via land routes is set to increase logistics costs and delays. Meanwhile, Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested over his comments on Operation Sindoor , facing charges related to endangering India's sovereignty. 17 of jeweller's family killed in Charminar blaze during weekend gathering A fire broke out early Sunday in a 100-year-old three-storey building near Hyderabad's Charminar, killing 17 members of a jeweller's family. They had gathered at their ancestral home in Gulzar Houz for a weekend get-together. The victims, aged between 2 and 73, included family head Prahlad Modi and eight children. Officials said they died from burns or suffocation. Read full story Ashoka University professor arrested over Operation Sindoor remarks Days after he claimed his remarks were misunderstood, Ashoka University associate professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested on Sunday over his comments on Operation Sindoor. He faces charges including endangering India's sovereignty, unity, and integrity. The FIR was registered at Rai police station in Sonipat following a complaint by Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson Renu Bhatia. Read full story Two held in Telangana-Andhra Pradesh joint operation for plotting blasts, testing explosives Two suspects, one from Hyderabad, have been arrested in a joint operation by the Telangana and Andhra Pradesh police for allegedly planning bomb blasts. Authorities said the duo was in the process of testing explosives before selecting a final target. The accused have been identified as Sameer, 27, a lift technician from Bhoiguda in Hyderabad, and Siraj Ur Rehman, an unemployed graduate from Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh. Read full story Former US President Joe Biden diagnosed with prostate cancer Former US President Joe Biden has been diagnosed with prostate cancer, his office announced on Sunday. The diagnosis came after recent medical tests raised concerns. Biden visited doctors earlier this week due to urinary symptoms, and a routine checkup revealed a small nodule in his prostate. Further testing confirmed on Friday that he has prostate cancer, which has already spread to his bones. Read full story India restricts land route RMG imports from Bangladesh, raising costs India's decision to restrict imports of ready-made garments (RMG) from Bangladesh via land routes is likely to push up logistics costs and delay deliveries. Apparel accounts for about a third of Bangladesh's exports to India. Previously, it took just 2–3 days for garments to cross land borders, but now shipments must go by sea to designated ports in Kolkata or Nhava Sheva (Mumbai), undergo customs clearance, and then be transported by land to Indian warehouses — significantly increasing transit time. Read full story
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Ashoka University professor held for ‘endangering unity' over post on Operation Sindoor ; aculty slams arrest as ‘calculated harassment'
Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson Renu Bhatia and BJP Yuva Morcha general secretary Yogesh Jatheri filed separate FIRs, leading to charges including endangering India's sovereignty. GURGAON: Days after the state women's commission summoned him, and he clarified that his comments had been completely misunderstood, Ashoka University associate professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested on Sunday and charged with, among other things, endangering India's sovereignty, unity and integrity for his comments on Operation Sindoor. The basis for the FIR that was filed at Rai police station in Sonipat, where the leading liberal arts and sciences university is located, was a complaint from Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson Renu Bhatia . On May 13, Bhatia had dispatched the summons to Mahmudabad. A day later, when he skipped appearing before the panel, saying it had no jurisdiction in the matter, she promised followup action. While DCP (crime) Narender Singh confirmed the arrest was related to the FIR filed on Bhatia's complaint, a second FIR was filed at the same police station against Mahmudabad on Sunday. The complainant in the other case is Yogesh Jatheri , the sarpanch of Jatheri village and a general secretary of BJP's Yuva Morcha. According to police, Jatheri's and Bhatia's complaints were unrelated. Ashoka University's faculty association calls professor's arrest 'calculated harassment' The professor, the son of 'Raja of Mahmudabad' Mohd Amir Mohd Khan 'Suleiman', is an MPhil in history and a PhD in social sciences from Cambridge, and heads Ashoka's political science department. He was taken into custody by a Haryana Police team from his residence in Delhi on Sunday morning and produced in a Sonipat court, which remanded him in police custody for two days. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The next hearing is scheduled at 2pm on May 20. Ashoka University's faculty association stood behind Mahmudabad, calling the arrest 'calculated harassment'. 'The faculty association of Ashoka University strongly condemns the arrest of Prof Mahmudabad on groundless and untenable charges. We condemn the calculated harassment to which he has been subjected: after being arrested early in the morning from his home in New Delhi, he was taken to Sonipat, not allowed access to necessary medication, and driven around for hours without any communication about his whereabouts. The faculty association stands in full support of our colleague — an invaluable member of the university community, a beloved and respected teacher and friend to his students, and a deeply responsible citizen, who brings all his energy and learning to promoting communal harmony and the greater good.' In the notice to Mahmudabad, the Bhatia-led panel had characterised his social media post of May 9 as an attempt to 'malign national military efforts and sow communal divisions'. Referring to his observations on the press briefings during the military operation by Col Sophiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, the panel alleged they disparaged women in the armed forces. What did the prof write? Mahmudabad had on May 14 clarified that what he had written in his May 9 post 'solely express concern over the rhetorical excesses and reckless warmongering exhibited by certain sections of the civilian public'. In the long post, Mahmudabad made the point that it's the poor who suffered from war while 'politicians and defence companies' benefitted from it. 'There are those who are mindlessly advocating for a war but they have never seen one let alone lived in or visited a conflict zone,' he wrote. On Col Qureshi and Wing Commander Singh, he had written in his May 9 post that he was 'very happy to see so many right-wing commentators applauding' the Indian Army officer, but 'perhaps they can equally loudly demand that victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing… are protected as Indian citizens'. 'The optics of two women soldiers presenting their findings is important, but optics must translate to reality on the ground, otherwise it's just hypocrisy,' he wrote. What were the objections? In its notice, the women's panel objected to his use of terms like 'genocide', 'hypocrisy' and 'dehumanisation'. 'There is also a misrepresentation of facts surrounding India's counter-terror operations, framed in a way that may encourage unrest or civil disturbance, a violation of women's dignity by indirectly questioning their role and legitimacy in military service, and a breach of ethical guidelines for university faculty under UGC Regulations, 2018,' the notice read. What was the prof's counter? There were no comments from anyone representing Mahmudabad on Sunday. In his reaction to the commission's May 14 summons, he had said, 'The summons issued to me fail to highlight how my post is contrary to the rights of or laws for women. Contrary to the allegations, my post appreciated the fact that the armed forces chose Colonel Sophiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh for the press conference to highlight the fact that the dream of the founders of our Republic, of an India which is united in its diversity, is still very much alive. I even applauded members of the right wing who supported Col Qureshi and invited them to have the same attitude for common Indian Muslims who face demonisation and persecution on a daily basis. If anything, my entire comments were about safeguarding the lives of both citizens and soldiers.' What are the charges in FIRs? In the FIR filed on Bhatia's complaint, police invoked sections 152 (acts that endanger India's sovereignty, unity and integrity), 353 (statements conducing to public mischief) and 79 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman). The FIR filed on Jatheri's complaint invoked section 196 (promoting enmity between different groups), 197 (imputations and assertions that could be prejudicial to national integration), 152 and 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs). DCP (crime) Singh said, 'There were two complaints, one by Renu Bhatia regarding the Facebook post and disregarding the commission's summons, and the other by a sarpanch which stated that the professor had said things to him.' What do complainants say? Asked about her complaint, Bhatia told TOI on Sunday, 'We do not accept anybody speaking inappropriately about any woman, let alone a woman in uniform being insulted. We visited the university on May 15 as Prof Ali did not appear before the commission on May 14. The university told us he was not there. By the time the commission could proceed, Prof Ali was believed to have been sent away. University officials, including the registrar and vice-chancellor, did not speak about the matter, which further annoyed the commission. ' She said she had filed the police complaint on May 15. When TOI asked Jatheri what his complaint was about, he said, 'The matter is of serious nature. I have filed a complaint for the comments he made against me.' Asked what these specific comments were, Jatheri again said they were 'serious' but refused to elaborate.
Deccan Herald
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Deccan Herald
Ashoka University associate professor arrested for remarks against Operation Sindoor
My statement re the summons that I received from the Haryana State Women's Commission. The posts that were misunderstood and objected to can be accessed on my Facebook page.
