Education • Campus News • Student Rights | October 26, 2026
A growing confrontation at the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute (SRFTI) in Kolkata has intensified debate over student protests, campus safety, disciplinary action, and access to essential academic facilities. Students participating in an ongoing agitation have alleged that electricity to the classroom they used for internet connectivity and workstation facilities was disconnected. The institute, meanwhile, has defended its disciplinary proceedings against six students, saying the action relates to alleged misconduct, vandalism, and physical assault rather than peaceful protest.
The dispute has developed against the backdrop of clashes reported on campus in September, renewed tensions in October, and an interruption to regular academic activities in key departments. Students have demanded accountability for the alleged violence and raised concerns about campus security, while administrators have argued that alleged violations of institutional rules must be addressed.
The situation has become a significant education story because it raises difficult questions about how institutions should respond when student demonstrations and allegations of misconduct collide. It also highlights the importance of protecting students, maintaining academic continuity, ensuring fair disciplinary procedures, and providing transparent communication during campus disputes.
As the situation unfolds, allegations from students and claims made by the institute must be distinguished from independently established facts. A fair understanding requires listening to both sides and allowing investigations and due processes to establish responsibility.
What Is the SRFTI Protest About? 🎥
The Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute is a prominent film and television education institution located in Kolkata, West Bengal. It provides specialised training in filmmaking and related creative disciplines, where students depend on classrooms, editing systems, digital workstations, screening facilities, and collaborative production environments.
The present protest is rooted in a wider dispute over campus security, accountability for alleged violence, and the administration’s handling of disciplinary proceedings.
Students have been staging an indefinite sit-in outside Vice-Chancellor Santosh Ajmera’s office since October 12, 2026. Their demands include the vice-chancellor’s resignation and accountability for alleged attacks on the campus.
The protest followed clashes on September 27 during an event organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat, a consumer-awareness organisation affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Reports said several students were injured during the clashes. Tensions rose again on October 4, when another demonstration took place outside the institute. Students alleged that stones, bricks, and bottles were thrown towards the campus.
These allegations form an important part of the background to the current confrontation. However, the precise responsibility for individual acts and the full sequence of events must be established through evidence and the relevant investigations.
The dispute has also affected ordinary campus life. Students have raised concerns about access to facilities, while the administration has cited the need to restore normal functioning and enforce institutional rules.
For students pursuing film and digital media programmes, the disruption is especially significant because much of their education involves practical work rather than classroom lectures alone.
Students Allege Electricity Was Cut to an Essential Classroom ⚡
One of the latest developments came on October 25, when protesting students alleged that the electricity supply to a classroom they had been using for internet connectivity and workstation access had been disconnected the previous evening.
According to the students, the room was their only accessible space for these facilities during the ongoing agitation. They argued that the reported power interruption further restricted their ability to use essential academic resources and increased pressure on those participating in the protest.
The allegation has raised questions about whether students should lose access to essential learning facilities during a dispute with institutional authorities.
Internet connectivity and computer workstations are important resources in modern film education. Students may need them to review footage, edit projects, access course materials, prepare presentations, communicate with collaborators, and complete assignments.
When access to these resources is interrupted, the effects can extend beyond the immediate inconvenience. Project deadlines may be affected, collaborative work may be delayed, and students may struggle to complete practical coursework.
However, the claim that the power supply was deliberately disconnected to pressure protesters remains an allegation made by students. Establishing the reason for the interruption would require relevant records and a clear account from the institute.
The administration disputed the students’ broader account of restricted connectivity. A senior official argued that the students had continued to livestream their activities, including a press conference, from the campus. The official’s statement challenged the suggestion that internet access had been completely cut off.
These claims are not necessarily identical: students referred to electricity in a particular classroom, while the official pointed to continued internet use elsewhere on campus. Further clarification would be needed to establish the precise circumstances.
The episode demonstrates why transparent communication is important during campus disputes. Information about maintenance work, access restrictions, power supply, and available academic facilities should be communicated clearly so that students and the wider public can understand what has occurred.
SRFTI Administration Defends Disciplinary Action Against Six Students
The institute has strongly defended its decision to take disciplinary action against six students. According to its statement, the proceedings concern alleged misconduct, vandalism, defacement, and physical assault—not the exercise of the right to peaceful protest.
Registrar Deepak Kumar said that rustication orders and show-cause notices had been issued in response to alleged violations of the institute’s by-laws and standards of student conduct.
The institute stated that recommendations for disciplinary action came from the Dean’s Council, which included department heads, the dean, the registrar, and members of a fact-finding committee examining the incidents.
The administration also alleged that the vice-chancellor’s office had been occupied and vandalised, with damaged windows, broken glass, and damaged furniture. It further claimed that water and air-conditioning lines had been deliberately cut and that the vice-chancellor had been manhandled during the confrontation.
These are serious allegations, but they should not be treated as judicially established findings merely because they appear in an institutional statement. The students’ responses, the evidence considered by the relevant committees, and any subsequent review remain important to understanding the case fully.
The administration has maintained that peaceful dissent is permitted, while conduct alleged to involve assault or property damage must be addressed under institutional rules.
This distinction is central to the dispute. An institution can have legitimate responsibilities to protect staff, students, and property while also respecting students’ ability to express disagreement and demand accountability.
The fairness of the process depends on whether the allegations are specific, the evidence is properly considered, the students have an opportunity to respond, and the resulting decisions follow applicable rules.
What Does Rustication Mean for Students?
Rustication is a disciplinary measure that can prevent a student from attending an institution for a specified period. Depending on the rules and the terms of the order, it may affect access to classes, campus facilities, examinations, accommodation, and academic progression.
For students enrolled in specialised professional programmes, such a decision can have significant consequences.
Film and television education frequently involves a sequence of practical modules, production exercises, editing assignments, screenings, and group projects. Missing part of the academic calendar may make it difficult to complete work that depends on equipment, studio access, or collaboration with classmates.
A disciplinary decision may also create financial and emotional strain for a student and their family. Tuition arrangements, accommodation, travel, and future career planning can all become uncertain.
For these reasons, disciplinary procedures should be conducted carefully and according to the applicable regulations.
Students facing allegations should receive clear information about the charges, the process for responding, the evidence that can be considered under the rules, and any available appeal or review mechanisms.
Institutions, in turn, should explain the reasons for their decisions in a manner that respects privacy while providing sufficient information to demonstrate procedural fairness.
This does not mean that serious misconduct should go unaddressed. Physical violence, intimidation, or deliberate damage to property—if established—can require proportionate consequences.
It means that penalties should be based on individual responsibility and a fair assessment of the evidence, rather than collective assumptions about everyone participating in a protest.
The SRFTI dispute illustrates why transparent disciplinary procedures matter to both sides. They help protect students from arbitrary treatment while giving institutions a legitimate way to address proven violations.
Why Access to Electricity and Internet Matters in Film Education đź’»
In a film school, digital resources are not merely optional conveniences. They form part of the basic infrastructure needed for teaching, practice, and creative development.
Students working in editing, animation, sound, cinematography, and electronic or digital media may rely on specialised computers and software to complete their projects. Internet access can also be necessary for research, downloading authorised learning materials, exchanging files, and accessing online resources.
An interruption to electricity can affect several parts of the workflow at once. Computers may become unusable, equipment may need to be restarted, and unsaved work may be lost. Some editing tasks also require powerful hardware that students cannot easily replace with a personal laptop.
Where a classroom is the only available location for particular workstations or a reliable connection, losing access to that room can create an additional barrier.
Academic institutions should therefore have clear policies for maintaining access to essential resources during disputes, maintenance work, emergencies, or temporary closures.
Where full access cannot be provided, administrators can explain the reasons and consider reasonable alternatives. Depending on the circumstances, these might include supervised access to another laboratory, temporary remote access to learning materials, or revised project deadlines.
Such arrangements do not require an institution to ignore security concerns. Instead, they help ensure that academic decisions are handled separately from disciplinary disagreements wherever possible.
Students also have a responsibility to follow safety rules, protect equipment, and respect legitimate access restrictions. The objective should be to maintain educational continuity without compromising the safety of students, staff, or campus property.
A clear and consistent approach to academic facilities can help prevent practical issues from becoming additional sources of conflict.
Academic Activities Suspended Until November 13
The dispute has already disrupted the institute’s regular academic schedule. On October 16, SRFTI suspended regular academic activities in its Film and Electronic and Digital Media departments until November 13 and directed students to vacate hostels and other campus premises within 24 hours.
The suspension creates uncertainty for students who need to complete coursework, practical exercises, and other academic requirements. It also places pressure on administrators to determine when normal activities can safely resume.
For students, the immediate concern is how the disruption will affect attendance, assessment schedules, project submissions, and the completion of their programmes.
Practical education cannot always be replaced by online lectures. A film student may need access to cameras, lighting equipment, sound-recording facilities, editing systems, or a supervised production environment. Even when theory lessons can be delivered remotely, hands-on activities may require a different arrangement.
The institute therefore faces the challenge of balancing campus safety and institutional order with its responsibility to deliver education.
A clear academic recovery plan could help reduce uncertainty. Such a plan might explain how missed sessions will be addressed, whether assessment dates will change, how practical projects will be completed, and where students can obtain updated instructions.
Communication is particularly important for students who live outside Kolkata or depend on institute accommodation. Changes to hostel access can affect travel costs, family arrangements, and the ability to remain near campus.
The administration should communicate any new decisions through official channels and provide reasonable clarity about the conditions for resuming academic activities.
At the same time, students should monitor verified announcements and avoid relying exclusively on unofficial messages. Until a fresh notice is issued, the reported November 13 date should be understood as the stated suspension period, not a guarantee that every activity will automatically resume on that day.
West Bengal Government Forms an SIT to Investigate Campus Violence 🔎
The conflict at SRFTI is not limited to the question of classroom electricity or student rustication. It follows earlier clashes that prompted the West Bengal government to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The team was formed to investigate the September 27 incident, during which several students were reportedly injured. The investigation is important because students have questioned whether their safety was adequately protected and have demanded accountability for those allegedly involved in the violence.
An investigation into a campus clash may need to examine witness accounts, available video footage, medical records, and other relevant evidence. It should establish the sequence of events and determine individual responsibility where the evidence permits.
The existence of an SIT does not itself establish guilt or innocence. Its role is to investigate the incident and help establish the facts through the applicable legal process.
For students, a credible investigation can provide a route towards addressing concerns about safety and accountability. For the administration, it can help clarify what occurred and identify any security or procedural failures that need correction.
The process also matters to the broader campus community. When people believe that allegations of violence are being investigated fairly, it becomes easier to distinguish evidence-based findings from competing narratives.
Authorities should communicate verified developments when appropriate, while protecting the integrity of the investigation and the privacy of those involved.
It is equally important that students, staff, and administrators avoid prejudging the outcome. The seriousness of an allegation should lead to careful investigation, not a substitute for it.
Student Rights, Campus Discipline, and Freedom of Expression
The SRFTI confrontation has renewed discussion about how educational institutions should handle peaceful protest.
Students may wish to demonstrate when they believe campus safety has been compromised, administrators have failed to respond adequately, or institutional decisions require greater transparency. Peaceful collective action can provide a way to communicate grievances and demand explanations.
However, institutions also have responsibilities to maintain safe premises, protect staff and students, safeguard property, and ensure that academic activities can take place.
The challenge is to uphold these responsibilities without treating every form of dissent as misconduct.
The institute has explicitly stated that it recognises the right of students to express views, raise grievances, and engage in peaceful protests. It has argued that its disciplinary measures are based on alleged acts that go beyond peaceful dissent.
This distinction should be evaluated through the facts of each case. Participation in a demonstration and participation in an alleged act of violence are not automatically the same thing.
A fair process should identify the conduct attributed to each individual, examine the available evidence, and apply the institution’s rules consistently. Students should have an opportunity to respond to allegations, while staff members and others who report harm should also be able to present their accounts.
Clear protest guidelines can help reduce future disputes. These might explain how demonstrations can be organised, which areas must remain accessible, how safety concerns should be reported, and what procedures apply when serious misconduct is alleged.
Such guidelines should be communicated before conflicts escalate wherever possible.
Dialogue is also essential. Regular meetings between student representatives and administrators can create a structured way to discuss grievances, document commitments, and track progress.
Dialogue does not require either side to abandon its position. It provides a way to address disagreements without allowing them to consume the institution’s educational mission.
The Role of Transparent Communication in Resolving Campus Disputes
Conflicting accounts can quickly deepen mistrust. When students report restrictions and administrators dispute those claims, the wider community needs reliable information to understand what is happening.
The reported electricity dispute is an example. Students said power to their accessible classroom had been cut, while an institute official pointed to continued livestreaming activity as evidence that internet access remained available.
A more detailed explanation of the room’s power status, the facilities available elsewhere, and the reasons for any restrictions could help clarify the issue.
Transparency does not mean releasing every internal document or making public statements about private disciplinary matters. It means communicating relevant information clearly and accurately, especially when decisions affect students’ access to education.
The institute could help reduce confusion by providing written updates on academic arrangements, hostel access, the status of essential facilities, and the procedures for submitting grievances.
Student representatives can contribute by communicating their concerns through clear, documented requests and distinguishing firsthand observations from information received from others.
Both sides should avoid personal attacks and unsupported claims about motives. Such statements can harden positions and make practical solutions more difficult to reach.
A neutral process for recording complaints, responding within a reasonable period, and tracking unresolved issues could also help. Where necessary, an independent or mutually accepted mediator may be useful for facilitating dialogue, provided the parties agree to the arrangement.
The goal should be to move from competing public statements towards verifiable information and specific steps that can improve campus conditions.
How the SRFTI Dispute Could Affect Students’ Future Careers
Film and television students invest significant time and resources in developing creative and technical skills. Their education often includes collaborative projects, portfolio development, professional networking, and practical experience with industry-standard equipment.
An extended disruption can therefore affect more than the academic calendar.
Students may need access to completed footage, project files, sound recordings, animation work, or other material required for assessments and portfolios. Missed workshops or production opportunities may also delay the development of practical skills.
For students approaching graduation, uncertainty about assessments and programme completion can be particularly stressful. Those planning internships, further study, or entry-level work may need reliable information about timelines and certification.
Institutions can reduce these effects by identifying the academic activities that have been interrupted and developing a realistic plan for completing them.
Where practical work cannot be rescheduled immediately, administrators and faculty members can explain the available alternatives and how assessment standards will be maintained.
Students can also preserve their own work responsibly, maintain records of completed assignments, and seek official clarification about project deadlines and access to academic files.
However, students should not be expected to resolve institutional problems independently. The institute remains responsible for communicating academic requirements and providing reasonable arrangements within its rules.
Protecting the value of students’ education should be a shared priority, even when serious disagreements exist between students and administrators.
The longer the uncertainty continues, the more important it becomes to provide clear information about academic progression and the steps needed to resume normal learning.
What Can Be Done to Restore Normalcy at SRFTI? 🤝
Resolving the ongoing confrontation will require more than a single announcement. The concerns about campus security, disciplinary proceedings, academic disruption, and access to facilities are connected, but each requires an appropriate response.
A constructive way forward could involve several practical steps.
First, clarify the immediate situation. The administration should provide accurate information about electricity, internet access, essential facilities, and the status of academic activities. Where restrictions remain necessary, their reasons and expected duration should be explained as clearly as possible.
Second, ensure fair disciplinary procedures. Allegations of assault, vandalism, or other misconduct should be assessed individually under the applicable rules. Students should be informed of the procedures available to them, including any relevant review or appeal mechanisms.
Third, address campus security concerns. The investigation into the September 27 violence should proceed through the appropriate channels. Any security weaknesses identified through credible evidence should be addressed.
Fourth, protect academic continuity. Students need clear guidance on assignments, practical sessions, examinations, access to project files, and the resumption of regular classes. A documented academic recovery plan could help limit uncertainty.
Fifth, reopen channels for dialogue. Structured meetings involving authorised student representatives and institute officials could help identify areas of agreement, record unresolved questions, and establish a process for following up on commitments.
Finally, communicate verified developments consistently. Regular updates can reduce speculation and help students, staff, and families understand the steps being taken.
These measures would not automatically settle every disagreement. Nevertheless, they could help create conditions in which the dispute is addressed through evidence, established procedures, and constructive engagement rather than further escalation.
Conclusion: A Critical Moment for Student Welfare and Institutional Accountability
The ongoing dispute at the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute has brought important questions about campus safety, student rights, disciplinary accountability, and educational continuity into public focus.
Students have alleged that electricity to a classroom used for internet and workstation facilities was disconnected during their protest. The institute has disputed aspects of their account and defended disciplinary proceedings against six students, citing alleged misconduct, vandalism, and physical assault.
The broader confrontation follows reported campus clashes in September and October, an investigation by a Special Investigation Team, and the suspension of regular academic activities in key departments until November 13.
At the centre of the issue are several responsibilities that must be taken seriously at the same time: students’ safety, the right to raise grievances peacefully, the fair handling of misconduct allegations, and the need to preserve access to education.
The institute must be able to enforce legitimate rules and protect its community. Students, in turn, should be able to raise concerns through peaceful and appropriate channels without their participation in a protest automatically being treated as proof of wrongdoing.
The allegations surrounding the power supply, the earlier clashes, and the disciplinary decisions require careful examination rather than premature conclusions. Transparent communication, fair procedures, and credible investigations can help establish the facts and rebuild trust.
Ultimately, an educational institution is strongest when academic excellence, student welfare, safety, and accountability reinforce one another. The priority now should be to resolve the dispute fairly, protect everyone on campus, and establish conditions in which students can return to their education with greater clarity and confidence.
The way forward lies in verified facts, fair accountability, constructive dialogue, and a renewed commitment to education. 🎬