The administration at Lucknow University has officially initiated disciplinary measures against a group of students following a series of intense protests regarding the Lal Baradari building located on the campus. On Tuesday, 24th February, university management issued formal notices and imposed a significant financial penalty of ₹50,000 each on 13 specific students.

This action comes after these individuals participated in religious prayers and public demonstrations outside the building, which had recently been closed off by officials. According to reports, the situation escalated when “these students created a ruckus and shouted slogans after the structure was sealed and even broke through police barricades.”

The legal basis for this disciplinary action stems from a report filed by the local Hasanganj police. Based on this documentation, the Lucknow Executive Magistrate decided to issue the notices. The police report highlighted that the student group had actively “interrupted ongoing construction work on campus and jeopardised the order by engaging in religious activities in a public area.” The university administration expressed serious concern over these events, firmly stating that “such actions have fostered tension among students, thereby heightening the risk of a major incident in the future.”

In an effort to ensure long-term stability on the campus, the authorities have implemented strict conditions for those involved. Each of the 13 students has been “directed all 13 students involved to present a bond of ₹50,000 each and two sureties as a guarantee for maintaining peace and order for a period of one year.” The individuals named in these official notices are Prince Prakash, Ahmed Raza, Shubham Kharwar, Tauqeer Ghazi, Navneet Yadav, Prem Prakash Yadav, Shivaji Yadav, Prasanna Shukla, Prince Kumar, Akshay Kumar Verma, Abhishek Srivastava, Kanchi Singh, and Mohammad Ayaz Hasan.

The root of the conflict dates back to 22nd February, when “Muslim students performed namaz outside the entrance of Lal Baradari following its sealing.” This act quickly became a focal point of campus friction. In a show of solidarity, “some Hindu students established a human chain, forming a security perimeter around them, escalating the controversy.” However, this unity was not universal. The Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) voiced strong opposition to the prayers, “arguing that they should also be permitted to recite the Sunderkand.” Following this, the Muslim student groups organized further protests, shouting slogans and demanding that the gates of the Lal Baradari be reopened immediately.

The tension was matched by counter-protests from other groups. “On the other hand, Hindu students also staged a protest at the university.” These students raised “Jai Shri Ram” slogans and brought forward their own historical claims to the site. They “expressed that there is a small temple within the Lal Baradari where they have been reciting the Sunderkand, but the administration obstructed their efforts.” These students raised sharp questions regarding the university’s oversight, asking “who authorised Muslim students to conduct namaz after causing a disturbance on the campus?”

The unrest spread to administrative offices as well. “Hindu students also gathered in protest outside the office of the proctor who was in favour of namaz.” The political atmosphere on campus grew more complex on 23rd February when members of various student organizations, including the Samajwadi Chhatra Sabha, the All India Students Association (AISA), and the National Students Union of India (NSUI), joined the demonstrations. During these events, “some NSUI students raised objections to the construction work, claiming it was on an ASI-protected site and they even tried to break the lock with a stone.”

By Tuesday, the situation had reached a boiling point. “Tensions further intensified as students gathered outside the structure on Tuesday.” In a symbolic gesture, “some individuals reportedly carried Ganga water and requested the purification of the area.” These gatherings eventually led to physical confrontations, as “altercations transpired between the students and the police after which a few of them were arrested.”

For its part, the university has maintained that its actions were based purely on safety and preservation. The administration clarified that “the Lal Baradari building is quite old and in a fragile state, and has been sealed off due to security concerns.” They further explained that “this action was essential for the building’s restoration and maintenance.” Anticipating the backlash, the university officials noted that they “had informed the police beforehand about possible protests” to prevent any potential injuries resulting from the building's dilapidated condition.