A clash erupted at Kolkata’s SRFTI after students disrupted an ABGP programme
KOLKATA: On September 27, tensions erupted at the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute (SRFTI) in Kolkata after members of the left-wing student organisation Student Federation of India (SFI) confronted participants of a programme organised by the RSS-linked Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat (ABGP). The event was being held at the institute’s Main Theatre auditorium when a group of SFI students reportedly entered the venue and attempted to disrupt the programme, leading to a confrontation.
When a consumer rights awareness program—a benign, essential service for the common man—is met with violence at the Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute (SRFTI) in Kolkata, we must ask: what has become of our academic spaces? The disruption of an event organized by the Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat (ABGP) is not merely a clash of ideologies; it is a direct assault on the fundamental right of citizens to be informed about their economic protections.
In a democracy, the marketplace of ideas should be as robust as the marketplace of goods. Yet, when students choose to silence a discussion on consumer empowerment, they reveal a deep-seated intolerance that masquerades as intellectual dissent. This was not a political rally; it was a session dedicated to educating the public on their rights against exploitation.
By attacking a booked, legitimate event, the agitators have signaled that they fear the empowerment of the ordinary consumer. It is a chilling reminder that for some, the ideological purity of an institution is more important than the welfare of the Indian citizen.
To understand the gravity of this attack, one must understand the ABGP. For decades, the Grahak Panchayat has been the silent sentinel of the Indian consumer. It is a non-political, grassroots movement that works tirelessly to ensure that the common man is not cheated by corporations, service providers, or systemic inefficiencies.
From advocating for transparent pricing to fighting against predatory practices, the Grahak Panchayat acts as a bridge between the law and the consumer. They provide the tools for the average Indian to navigate the complexities of the Consumer Protection Act. When you attack such an organization, you are not attacking a political entity; you are attacking the shield of the consumer.
It is imperative that we explain, again and again, that the Grahak Panchayat is about economic justice. It is about ensuring that the hard-earned money of an Indian family is protected. To disrupt their work is to actively work against the economic interests of the very people these students claim to represent.
The SRFTI, an institution of national importance, should be a place where diverse perspectives are debated, not suppressed. The fact that a consumer awareness program was targeted suggests that the campus has become an echo chamber where any organization associated with nationalist thought is treated as an existential threat.
This culture of ‘cancel culture’—where physical violence is used to prevent the dissemination of information—is a stain on our academic infrastructure. When institutions of higher learning become sites of intimidation, they lose their moral authority to speak on democracy or freedom of expression.
We must demand accountability. The administration of SRFTI must ensure that booked spaces remain safe for all, regardless of the ideological leanings of the organizers. If we allow the ‘right to protest’ to become a ‘right to disrupt,’ we are on a slippery slope toward institutional decay.
The incident at SRFTI highlights a disturbing trend: the systematic delegitimization of organizations that do not fit a specific, narrow ideological mold. By framing the ABGP as an ‘RSS-linked’ entity, the agitators attempt to justify their hostility, effectively labeling any work done by such groups as illegitimate.
This narrative is inherently anti-Hindu in its exclusionary nature, as it seeks to marginalize organizations that draw inspiration from indigenous cultural and social values. It is a form of intellectual untouchability that seeks to purge the public square of any influence that does not align with a specific, often Western-centric, academic orthodoxy.
Furthermore, this behavior undermines the Indian State’s efforts to foster a culture of consumer awareness. When the state provides the framework for consumer rights, and civil society organizations like the Grahak Panchayat work to implement them, those who disrupt these efforts are effectively attacking the institutional mechanisms that protect the Indian public.
As India marches toward becoming a global economic powerhouse, the role of the informed consumer has never been more critical. Our growth is not just about GDP figures; it is about the dignity and security of every individual participating in the economy. The Grahak Panchayat’s mission is a vital component of this national development.
We must reject the politics of disruption. The path forward for India lies in strengthening our institutions and ensuring that every citizen, from the student to the shopkeeper, is aware of their rights. We cannot allow the intolerance of a few to derail the empowerment of the many.
Let this incident be a wake-up call. We must protect the spaces where consumer rights are discussed, and we must continue to support the work of organizations that stand for the common man. The future of a strong, consumer-conscious India depends on our ability to keep the doors of dialogue open, even when we disagree.
The controversy has also brought attention to the ideological dimension of the confrontation. Students objected to ABGP because of its association with the RSS, while ABGP maintained that it was conducting a consumer-rights programme after obtaining permission to use the institute’s auditorium.
The Kolkata Police have registered three FIRs in connection with the violence. According to sources, police registered one case suo motu against students, while two others were based on complaints from the institute’s dean and the ABGP.
Police deployment continued around the institute on September 28, although the situation was reported to have returned to normal, with students attending classes and people who had gathered outside dispersing.
