SRFTI Defends Rustication of Six Students, Says Action Was Over Alleged Misconduct, Not Protests

The Kolkata film institute cited alleged vandalism, physical assault and intimidation as grounds for disciplinary action, as actor Naseeruddin Shah expressed solidarity with protesting students.

The Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute (SRFTI) in Kolkata has defended its decision to rusticate six students, stating that the disciplinary action stemmed from alleged misconduct, vandalism and physical assault rather than their participation in campus protests.

In a statement issued on October 25, the institute said the proceedings followed alleged violations of its by-laws and student conduct rules. The clarification came amid an ongoing campus agitation, after actor Naseeruddin Shah publicly expressed solidarity with the protesting students.

SRFTI cited an incident on October 15 involving the alleged occupation and vandalism of Vice-Chancellor Santosh Ajmera’s office. According to the institute, windowpanes were shattered, furniture was damaged and air-conditioning lines were deliberately cut during the incident.

The administration further alleged that one student manhandled Ajmera, while others intimidated and verbally abused him. It described the incidents as “serious breaches of discipline” and said the allegations warranted disciplinary proceedings.

The institute maintained that the action was not intended to penalise students for peacefully expressing their views. It said the Dean’s Council examined the incidents and recommended disciplinary action in accordance with the institute’s rules.

The six students were rusticated on October 15, as tensions on campus escalated.

The students’ agitation has centred on demands for Ajmera’s resignation and questions over the administration’s handling of violence on campus in September. The students’ union has disputed the institute’s allegations, placing the disciplinary action at the centre of an increasingly contentious standoff between students and the administration.

Shah’s expression of solidarity has brought wider attention to the dispute, which raises questions about disciplinary accountability, student representation and the right to protest within an educational institution.

While SRFTI has maintained that the rustications relate to alleged acts of misconduct rather than peaceful dissent, the students’ objections underscore the continuing disagreement over the events that led to the action.

The dispute remains a test of whether the institute can address allegations of misconduct while ensuring that disciplinary measures do not undermine legitimate student protest. The allegations cited by the administration and the students’ union’s objections remain central to understanding the controversy.