Back
DU Elections: Clashes Between ABVP and Rival Groups Leave Students, Teacher Injured
The final days of campaigning for the Students’ Union (DUSU) elections were marred by a series of violent clashes across multiple campuses, leaving several students and at least one teacher injured. The incidents have raised serious legal and security concerns, with allegations of police inaction and the involvement of outsiders dominating discussions among students, faculty, and law enforcement authorities.
The most serious altercation occurred on evening outside Law Centre-I, where a confrontation between members of the and workers of the ’s youth wings, including the and the , resulted in injuries. According to ABVP, three of its members were hurt, two with head wounds and one with a fractured hand. Deputy Commissioner (North) Niharika Bhatt described it as a “minor verbal altercation and scuffle” that broke out around 5 PM. However, students reported that heavy police barricading was deployed from Kirori Mal College toward Chhatra Marg, and the old Faculty of Law premises were cleared as a precaution.
A day earlier, on , an altercation between two Satyawati College students during campaigning left both injured and two vehicles damaged near Wazirpur village in north-west Delhi. Police identified the injured as 19-year-olds Ansh and Bhavishya Chaudhary, who were taken to . A police officer stated that two parked vehicles had their windowpanes shattered, and CCTV footage was being examined to identify all those present. Notably, claims of firing during this clash were denied by the , who labeled them “completely false and factually incorrect.”
The most alarming incident involved a teacher at Motilal Nehru College (Evening), who was allegedly assaulted by a DUSU campaigner. Faculty members staged a protest and demanded action. “A DUSU campaigner beat a faculty member. He is grievously injured and is receiving medical attention,” a teacher told reporters. The identity of the assailant remains unclear, but the incident has sparked outrage among the academic community.
Background of Campus Tensions
The DUSU elections have historically been a flashpoint for political rivalry, with student wings of national parties—ABVP (-affiliated), NSUI (Congress-affiliated), and (’s student wing)—competing for control. Campaigning often involves large processions and aggressive canvassing, and this year’s polls were no exception. The administration had imposed strict rules limiting the number of campaigners inside colleges to five, but students alleged that these rules were routinely flouted.
On evening, a scuffle outside Motilal Nehru College between ABVP and members escalated despite police presence. A student, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “Fifty to 60 members from the ABVP walked into the campus even though the rules do not allow more than five students to enter. The students attacked each other and police did not even stop them while they were fighting in front of them.” Such allegations of police non-intervention became a recurring theme across the university.
Police Deployment and Official Responses
In response to the violence, the ramped up its presence across North Campus, deploying paramilitary forces alongside 150 personnel from the North zone. Flag marches were conducted, and detention vehicles and patrol motorcycles were stationed around campuses. DCP Niharika Bhatt stated that the police were responsible for maintaining law and order both inside the university and on adjoining streets. “We have paramilitary forces and 150 personnel from the North zone deployed across the North Campus,” she said, adding that entry of outsiders was being restricted at gates.
However, many students felt that the increased deployment did little to prevent clashes. A first-year student complained, “There are police everywhere, but it is not really helping. The police are just deployed and are patrolling. But they are not really intervening or stopping anyone when fights or scuffles happen between student groups.”
The university’s Proctor, Manoj Kumar Singh, acknowledged the incidents but attributed them to outsiders. “So far, it appears that the clashes have involved supporters from outside the college. However, if we receive a complaint, we will examine the CCTV footage and conduct an inquiry, and action will be taken if the culprits are found to be students.” This distinction between students and outsiders is crucial for potential and .
Legal Implications and Analysis
From a legal perspective, the incidents raise several questions regarding , police duty, and university disciplinary powers. The injuries sustained in the clashes could attract charges under sections of the such as 323 (), 325 (), 341 (), 147 (), and 148 ( armed with a deadly weapon). The assault on the teacher could additionally involve Section 353 ( from discharge of duty) if the teacher is considered a , or Section 332 ( to deter ). However, no formal complaints have been filed yet in many cases, leaving the legal process in abeyance.
The police’s failure to intervene actively—despite being present—may expose them to allegations of under ( disobeying law). The DCP’s characterization of the Law Centre-I clash as “minor” may be scrutinized given the reported injuries. Legal experts note that the police have a legal obligation to prevent and to arrest those committing in their presence.
Moreover, the university’s disciplinary mechanism under the Act and its ordinances may impose sanctions including suspension, expulsion, or debarment from elections for students found guilty of violence. The Proctor’s inquiry will be key in determining whether the perpetrators were actually students or outsiders. If outsiders were involved, the police would need to investigate (Section 447 IPC) and .
The presence of armed paramilitary forces on campus indicates that the administration took the threat of violence seriously, yet their visible presence did not deter the clashes. This may prompt a review of election security protocols, including the use of , seeking of from candidates, and stricter enforcement of the five-person rule.
Impact on Campus Life and Future Elections
For the majority of students not involved in politics, the election period became an ordeal of disrupted classes, traffic congestion, and fear. “Classes are cut off or don’t happen and you can’t really study because of the elections. One time one person comes in and another time another for campaigning,” lamented a student. The violence has further eroded trust in the election process and in the ability of both the university and police to ensure a safe environment.
was declared a no-campaigning day, with voting scheduled for the following day. The heightened security is expected to continue. However, without a clear legal deterrent, the cycle of violence may persist in future elections.
Conclusion
The DUSU election campaign of will be remembered as one of the most violent in recent years, with injuries to students and a teacher, property damage, and allegations of police inaction. The legal community will be watching closely to see whether any criminal charges are filed, whether the university takes decisive disciplinary action, and whether the police reform their approach to campus security. Until then, the broader issue of maintaining law and order on university campuses remains unresolved, posing a challenge for the in educational spaces.
