A Mumbai court has denied bail to two students from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) who were detained for chanting slogans demanding the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The decision to maintain the students’ custody underscores a tightening judicial approach toward student activism and expressions of solidarity with individuals incarcerated under India’s most stringent national security laws.
The students were arrested during demonstrations centered on the prolonged detention of Khalid and Imam, both of whom have remained in custody for years in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots. The court’s refusal to grant bail suggests that the judiciary views the specific nature of the slogans used during the protest as a justification for continued pretrial detention, despite the students’ status as academics at a premier social sciences institution.
The Incident and Legal Proceedings
The arrests occurred following a series of demonstrations where TISS students and other activists gathered to protest the legal status of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The protesters specifically called for the immediate release of the two men, arguing that their incarceration is politically motivated.
According to court proceedings, the state’s case rests on the assertion that the slogans chanted during the protest went beyond peaceful assembly and crossed into territory that could incite public disorder or challenge the state’s authority. The prosecution argued that the call for the release of individuals accused of conspiracy and sedition constitutes a threat to the prevailing law and order.
The defense argued that the students were exercising their fundamental right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. They contended that demanding the release of prisoners—regardless of the charges they face—is a legitimate political expression and does not constitute a criminal act. However, the court rejected these arguments, denying the bail application and ordering the students to remain in custody.
Why This Matters
The denial of bail in this case is significant because it signals a low threshold for the criminalization of political speech within academic spaces. TISS has long been a hub for social critique and student activism; the targeting of its students suggests that the state is increasingly unwilling to tolerate dissent that aligns with the narratives of those already imprisoned under security laws.
Furthermore, the case highlights the “chilling effect” on campus discourse. When the act of chanting a slogan becomes a cause for prolonged detention, it creates a deterrent for other students and faculty members to engage in public advocacy or critique government legal actions. The judicial decision effectively validates the state’s position that calling for the release of UAPA (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act) detainees is an act of instability rather than an act of protest.
Background and Context
To understand the gravity of the slogans used by the TISS students, it is necessary to examine the legal status of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Both individuals were arrested in the aftermath of the 2020 Delhi riots. They have been charged under the UAPA, a law that grants the state sweeping powers to designate individuals as terrorists and makes obtaining bail exceptionally difficult.
Umar Khalid, a former professor and activist, and Sharjeel Imam, a law graduate, have spent years in prison without conviction. Their cases have become international symbols of the debate over the use of sedition and anti-terror laws to stifle political dissent in India. Human rights organizations have repeatedly called for their release, citing a lack of evidence and the violation of due process.
The TISS protests were part of a broader movement of students and civil society members who view the continued incarceration of Khalid and Imam as a misuse of the legal system. By linking their protests to these specific figures, the TISS students were inserting themselves into a high-stakes legal and political conflict. The state’s response—arrests and the subsequent denial of bail—reflects a strategy of isolating these figures by penalizing those who advocate for them.
Analysis:
The denial of bail in this instance reflects a continuing judicial trend in India where expressions of solidarity with political prisoners—particularly those charged under stringent laws such as the UAPA—are treated as potential threats to public order. By denying bail for slogans, the court is prioritizing the state’s security narrative over the students’ right to protest and freedom of expression.
This case highlights the precarious legal position of student activists in India, where calling for the release of individuals accused of sedition or conspiracy can lead to immediate criminalization and pretrial detention. The judiciary is increasingly adopting a “preventative” logic, where the potential for future unrest is used to justify the current deprivation of liberty. This shift effectively transforms the bail process from a mechanism to prevent unnecessary detention into a tool for punitive pretrial incarceration.
What to Watch Next
The legal trajectory of the two TISS students will likely serve as a bellwether for student rights in Mumbai and across India. Observers should monitor whether the students’ legal team appeals the bail denial to a higher court, and whether the state seeks to add more serious charges, such as sedition or UAPA, to the students’ case.
Additionally, the reaction within TISS and other universities will be critical. If the campus community organizes further protests in support of the detained students, it may lead to a cycle of further arrests and judicial crackdowns. The potential for these arrests to spark wider student unrest across the country remains a key point of interest for monitors of civic freedom.
Finally, the eventual trial of the students will be scrutinized to see if the prosecution can provide concrete evidence that slogans alone caused a breach of public peace, or if the detention is maintained solely as a means of political deterrence.
Conclusion
The detention of two TISS students for chanting slogans is not an isolated legal event but a reflection of a broader institutional trend. By denying bail, the Mumbai court has reinforced the state’s ability to penalize political solidarity. As the legal battle continues, the case stands as a stark reminder of the narrowing space for dissent in India’s academic institutions and the increasing risk associated with advocating for those caught in the machinery of the state’s security laws.
Sources:
India Today – India: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/law-news/story/mumbai-court-denies-bail-2-students-over-release-of-umar-khalid-sharjeel-imam-2966295-2026-08-08?utm_source=rss
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: India Today – India — source
