NEW DELHI: Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in Delhi has taken cognisance of graffiti that appeared on campus walls over the weekend and launched an internal inquiry, after slogans that included “Free Umar Khalid” and “Long Live Naxalbari” were reported on Saturday, 24-25 October 2026. The university administration has said campus peace will not be allowed to be disturbed and that such graffiti will not be tolerated, according to reports of its response.
The Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) alleged that left-wing student groups were behind the slogans and named the All India Students’ Association (AISA) in its complaint. The ABVP alleged that the walls were defaced and that objectionable text appeared alongside a portrait of VD Savarkar. It demanded that the university identify those responsible and take action against them. The identity of the persons who wrote the graffiti has not been established, and the administration’s inquiry is aimed at establishing who was responsible.
The episode also produced counter-slogans on campus, in what reports described as a graffiti face-off. Among the counter-slogans reported were “Never free Umar Khalid”, “Stop Love Jihad” and “Akhand Bharat”. The competing slogans underlined how quickly wall-writing can become a wider political argument. Neither side’s attribution has been confirmed by the university so far.
JNU’s response, as reported, has been to treat the matter as a disciplinary and campus-order issue rather than to endorse any group’s version of events. Officials have said an internal inquiry has been launched and that graffiti of this kind will not be tolerated. The university has not, in the reports available, named any individual or organisation as responsible, and it has not announced a timeline for the inquiry’s conclusion.
Reports have also carried an unverified claim that CCTV wiring was allegedly cut so that footage could not be recovered. That claim should be treated with caution: it has been reported as an allegation, not as a confirmed fact established by the university or by any investigation. Whether camera footage exists, and what it shows, will be central to the inquiry if the administration is to move from competing claims to an evidence-based finding. Until then, the circumstances in which the graffiti appeared remain disputed.
The JNU row follows a similar graffiti episode at Jamia Millia Islamia days earlier, where slogans supporting Sharjeel Imam and “Free Kashmir” were reported. At Jamia, the administration accused political leaders of trespassing, a charge that opposition figures denied. The sequence of two campus graffiti controversies in Delhi within days has drawn attention to how universities handle political wall-writing, the line between protest and defacement, and the difficulty of policing large, open campuses at night.
Congress MP Imran Masood, who represents Saharanpur, responded on 25 October, saying he needs no “certificate of patriotism” from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He questioned trial delays, pointing to remarks that five years have passed and a trial has yet to begin, and called for the Supreme Court to look into the matter. He also dismissed BJP criticism of the Congress’s planned 1 November rally in Delhi. His comments show how a campus incident can quickly acquire a national political dimension.
For now, the facts that are established are limited: graffiti appeared, rival slogans followed, student groups have traded allegations, and the university has opened an inquiry. Everything beyond that — who wrote the slogans, in what circumstances, and what action should follow — remains to be determined by that inquiry. How even-handed the process is seen to be will shape whether the episode subsides or becomes a longer dispute.
