The political atmosphere in Karnataka has turned turbulent following strong remarks by Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) president B.K. Hariprasad. Defending former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student activist Umar Khalid—who faces charges under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the 2020 northeast Delhi violence—Hariprasad explicitly referred to him as a “nationalist”.

Interacting with reporters in Bengaluru, the senior Congress leader hit out at the right-wing student organization Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), questioning their democratic credentials.

“Umar Khalid is a nationalist, and ABVP (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad) has no right to speak on him because they adore Nathuram Godse, who was an anti-national and the first terrorist of the country. They have no moral right or moral ethics to speak on Khalid,” Hariprasad declared, directly targeting the ideological roots of the student wing.

The controversy erupted against the backdrop of a fierce standoff at the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) in Bengaluru. A special solidarity screening of the documentary titled Prisoner No. 626710 is Present, directed by filmmaker Lalit Vachani—who currently teaches at the University of Göttingen in Germany—had been slated for 7:00 pm on Monday, September 14. The film examines the six years of pre-trial incarceration endured by Khalid since his arrest in September 2020. However, the event was abruptly pulled from the schedule following escalating friction on campus.

A day before the scheduled showcase, NLSIU officially announced the deferral, citing “logistical and security concerns.” Addressing the student body and administrative staff, the university asserted that the decision was strictly procedural and not an admission of defeat under pressure.

“We are making it clear that we are not backing out of the event because of pressure from anyone. The postponement is a precautionary step taken to ensure that the screening can be held in a safe and responsible manner,” the institution clarified, assuring students that the event would still take place later within the ongoing academic trimester. For background on the campus standoff, see reportage in The Hindu and The Indian Express.

ABVP Mounts Fierce Resistance Against the Glorification of Khalid

The ABVP has mounted relentless resistance against the documentary and petitioned the Union Government to step in directly, demanding the “immediate and absolute cancellation” of the film. Taking aim at the campus authorities, the student body called for “a comprehensive inquiry into the NLSIU administration and organising committee regarding how permission was granted for an event glorifying an individual accused of anti-national activities and civil disruption, while ignoring formal complaints submitted by student bodies.”

Escalating the matter to the highest administrative levels, the Bengaluru unit of the ABVP sent formal memorandums to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Union Education Minister Pralhad Joshi, and Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal, urging urgent central intervention. Dismissing the administration's stated rationale, the student wing labeled the postponement a mere “stalling tactic” crafted solely to suppress mounting public anger. They argued that premier academic centers of higher learning must never be turned into launching pads for partisan political propaganda.

In its formal plea, the ABVP insisted that the central government direct the law school to permanently rescind every clearance granted to produce, broadcast, or promote the documentary on university property. While acknowledging that open intellectual engagement and academic freedom remain constitutionally guaranteed protections, the group argued that institutional reputation, national security, and national sovereignty must always take legal precedence over unfettered freedom of expression.

Nationalist Remark Sparks Bitter Clash: BJP Leader CT Ravi Slams Hariprasad, Accusing Congress of Pursuing ‘Bharat Todo’ Agenda

Addressing a press conference at the state BJP headquarters in Malleshwaram, Bengaluru, BJP Member of the Legislative Council (MLC) C.T. Ravi launched a blistering counter-offensive against Hariprasad’s remarks, asserting that romanticizing Khalid as a patriot reflects an “anti-national mindset” and insults genuine martyrs.

Expressing dismay over the KPCC chief's comments, Ravi insisted that legitimate democratic disagreements had been completely crossed:

“I thought B.K. Hariprasad was a political opponent. I did not know that he was anti-national,” Ravi stated, demanding to know the legal or moral rationale for conferring the title of nationalist upon an individual facing such serious criminal indictments.

Ravi invoked the controversial slogans historically linked to Khalid, questioning which country the activist genuinely represents. He argued that Hariprasad’s remarks were not a harmless personal opinion, but an explicit political strategy crafted to fracture the country, directly insulting soldiers and citizens who laid down their lives for India. To underscore his point, the BJP leader drew a direct parallel with violent extremism, contending that if figures like Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab or cadres of outlawed terror outfits were celebrated as martyrs, society would react with universal outrage; he warned that Hariprasad's rhetoric would expose the Congress to identical public derision.

Ravi went on to claim that the remarks were driven entirely by competitive vote-bank appeasement, cautioning that this ideological path would ultimately damage the Congress itself. He threw down a challenge to the national high command to make their position unequivocal:

“Is this Rahul Gandhi’s statement? Is this Sonia Gandhi’s statement? Is this Mallikarjun Kharge’s statement? Is this the Congress party’s statement? Clarify it,” Ravi demanded.

Turning the Congress party's national outreach campaign on its head, Ravi argued that defending Khalid dismantled their core message: “Your statement is not Bharat Jodo, but Bharat Todo.”

Ravi’s sharp intervention came twenty-four hours after Hariprasad had censured the ABVP over its campus campaign against Prisoner No. 626710 Is Present. The screening had been coordinated by the student-led Committee for Law and Society at NLSIU. Billed as an academic forum for September 14 at 7:00 pm, the event was intended to accompany panel discussions examining pre-trial detention, the stringent hurdles of bail jurisprudence, political dissent, and the delicate equilibrium between criminal statutes and democratic civil liberties.

Ravi criticized Hariprasad for employing double standards when defining patriotism, accusing the Congress of calibrating its moral compass to suit political expediency. He maintained that brave individuals who shed their blood for the nation must never be placed on the same pedestal as figures confronting grave anti-terror allegations.

Connecting the dispute to local governance, the BJP MLC tied the controversy to a concurrent political dispute in Karnataka over remarks made by T. Narasipura Police Inspector Dhananjay during the Ganesh festival celebrations. Criticizing Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar's public defense of the police officer, Ravi alleged that the ruling administration would have initiated immediate disciplinary and punitive action had similar statements targeted any other religious minority community. He alleged that the state government acts swiftly when protecting the sensitivities of minority groups while turning indifferent when Hindu devotees are insulted, claiming this asymmetry unmasked the administration's broader posture toward different faiths.

The confrontation marks another volatile chapter in the ongoing friction between the Congress and the BJP in Karnataka, touching the recurring flashpoints of national sovereignty, cultural identity, free speech, and law enforcement.

Umar Khalid was taken into custody under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in September 2020 by Delhi Police investigators in connection with the wider conspiracy probe into the 2020 northeast Delhi riots. The indictment list includes other activists such as Sharjeel Imam. The charges remain sub judice before the courts, where trial proceedings and bail applications are under judicial review, meaning criminal guilt has not been conclusively established by the mere filing of charges or prolonged arrests.

This latest war of words between Hariprasad and Ravi is set to further polarize the political landscape surrounding the deferred documentary screening. While the Congress defends academic freedom and questions the ABVP's moral standing, the BJP maintains that providing a platform to individuals facing anti-terror prosecutions compromises institutional integrity and demeans national sacrifices. Ravi reiterated that Hariprasad must explicitly state whether his defense reflects his personal conviction or the official doctrine of the Congress leadership, emphasizing that political partisanship must never undermine national unity.