A police constable in Siwan, Bihar, has been suspended following allegations that he fired an AK-47 rifle into the air during a student-led protest against the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). The incident occurred on July 20, during which demonstrators gathered in the city to voice discontent over perceived irregularities in exam results. The constable, identified as Abhishek Kumar, was part of a District Intelligence Unit (DIU) team investigating an unrelated murder case when his vehicle became entangled in a crowd of protesters at JP Chowk. According to officials, Kumar fired four rounds into the air without authorization, prompting immediate disciplinary action by the Siwan district administration. District magistrate Vivek Ranjan Maitrey and superintendent of police Puran Kumar Jha confirmed that Kumar had been suspended with immediate effect. Departmental proceedings have been initiated against him, with authorities emphasizing that the firing was unauthorized and inappropriate. Maitrey stated that Kumar did not have orders to open fire and that the weapon should not have been present in public. The Bihar Police, in a statement, acknowledged that Kumar had pointed the rifle upward and fired to protect public safety and government property. However, the police also clarified that no casualties resulted directly from the shooting. Three individuals sustained minor injuries from bullets, though none were hit at the scene where Kumar fired. Md Arif, 17, and Akash Kumar, 22, were injured near Hafiz Chowk, approximately 1.5 kilometers from the incident location, while 20-year-old Bullet Kumar Gaur was found wounded near the Traffic Police Station, roughly 2 kilometers away. All three were treated at Siwan Sadar Hospital before being transferred to Medanta Hospital in Patna. Md Arif has since been discharged. Separate First Information Reports (FIRs) have been registered at the Siwan Town Police Station based on statements from the injured. An ongoing investigation is expected to yield further details. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of India has been scrutinizing the broader context of police actions during the NEET protests, particularly concerning the use of pellet guns. A plea filed by former Central Information Commissioner Yashovardhan Azad and two protesters challenged the deployment of pellet guns, arguing that such weapons violate constitutional principles. The court has directed the Centre to preserve the ammunition logs of the Rapid Action Force (RAF) deployed at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi during the protests. The bench, including Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, emphasized the need for transparency and an independent investigation into allegations of police excesses. The court also raised questions about the legality of using pellet guns, referencing guidelines from the Bureau of Police Research and Development. While acknowledging that pellet guns can be authorized in exceptional circumstances, the judiciary expressed concern over their potential misuse. The court instructed the Delhi government to provide appropriate medical treatment to those injured during the protests and urged the Centre to maintain records of ammunition usage. The Supreme Court has yet to rule definitively on whether the use of pellet guns violated legal protocols, leaving the issue open for further examination. In another development, the CRPF conducted a post-event review of its operations during the July 20 protests, asserting that all standard operating procedures (SOPs) were followed. The force maintained that non-lethal measures, including the use of pellet guns, were authorized and applied in accordance with established guidelines. The review concluded that around three to five protesters were injured by metal pellets, alongside 47 RAF personnel, six of whom suffered head injuries. The CRPF’s Director General, G P Singh, stated that the matter is "sub judice" and that any findings will be submitted to the Supreme Court. The force reiterated that the use of force adhered to legal frameworks and was justified under the circumstances. As the legal and administrative processes unfold, the focus remains on ensuring accountability and establishing clear protocols for managing protests. The Supreme Court has hinted at the possibility of forming a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or a high-powered committee to conduct a thorough and impartial inquiry into the events of July 20. The court has also underscored the importance of developing a unified national protocol to guide police responses to future demonstrations, ensuring both public safety and the protection of individual rights.
5 reports
The PrintIndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 758 days agoLeft-affiliated student unions in Telangana organized a bandh (strike) to protest against the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), which is a standardized exam required for admission to medical colleges in India. The protest reflects concerns among students and their organizations regarding the NEET policy, potentially related to issues such as access, fairness, or the impact of the exam on admissions processes. Such protests often highlight broader debates around educational policies and their implications for students.
Bias read (Progressive): The article explicitly mentions 'left-affiliated students unions,' indicating a clear alignment with leftist groups. This framing suggests a focus on the actions of politically aligned entities rather than presenting a balanced view of the issue itself.
Why factuality (85): The article provides a first-person account of a protester's experience with pellet gun fire, including specific details about the injury and the sequence of events. It aligns with the cross-source consensus that pellet guns were used during the protests. The report is based on a victim's testimony,
Why objectivity (75): The article has a more emotional tone due to the personal account, which can influence perception. While it presents the protester's experience objectively, the focus on individual trauma may give it a slightly more empathetic slant, affecting overall objectivity.
NDTVParty-alignedCenterFactual 80Objective 853 days agoA protester involved in the NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test) demonstration, named Ahmed, has requested bail from the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Kamrup (Metro). Ahmed argues that since the Assam government has decided to drop all cases related to the NEET protests, his case should also be dismissed. He is currently in judicial custody and is seeking release based on this policy change.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of a legal request made by an individual affected by the Assam government's decision to drop NEET protest-related cases. There is no overt ideological framing or emphasis on specific political viewpoints. The narrative remains neutral, focusing on the legal and
Why factuality (80): The article reports on a Supreme Court ruling allowing FIR probes into the NEET protests while barring coercive action against students. It aligns with the cross-source consensus that the court is investigating potential police excesses. The report is based on official court decisions and maintains
Why objectivity (85): The article presents the court's decision in a neutral manner, focusing on the legal implications without taking sides. It maintains a balanced tone throughout, avoiding emotionally charged language and sticking to the facts presented by the judiciary.
Hindustan TimesIndependentCenterFactual 65Objective 652 days agoThe Delhi government has decided to stop pursuing legal action against individuals involved in protests over alleged irregularities in the NEET (UG) examination, except for those with criminal records. The decision follows a crackdown by Delhi Police on protesters during the 'Chalo Sansad' march on July 20, where 2,873 people were identified through CCTV footage. Of these, nearly 1,000 had criminal antecedents. The government stated that legal protections apply to most protesters but exclude those with criminal histories. The move comes amid ongoing protests led by the Cockroach Janta Party, which called for reforms to the examination system and the resignation of then-education minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The protests gained traction after the NEET exam was canceled due to alleged misconduct.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Delhi government's decision to halt legal action against protesters, emphasizing the exclusion of those with criminal records. While the issue of legal action against protesters is politically charged, the article maintains a balanced tone by quoting official statements and,
Why factuality (65): The article discusses the recovery of a protester but omits the use of pellet guns and shock batons. It focuses on the medical outcome rather than the physical methods of crowd control detailed in the primary source.
Why objectivity (65): The article presents the medical update in a neutral manner, focusing on the patient's recovery. It avoids strong language but still emphasizes the impact of the police action on the protester.
The PrintIndependentProgressiveFactual 60Objective 658 days ago Left student unions organise bandh in Telangana over NEET issueLeft-wing student organizations in Telangana have organized a bandh (a form of protest involving a shutdown) in response to issues related to the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). This examination is crucial for students seeking admission to medical colleges in India. The protest reflects concerns among left-leaning groups regarding the NEET policy, potentially highlighting disagreements over educational reforms or access to medical education. Such actions often aim to draw attention to specific grievances and influence policy discussions.
Bias read (Progressive): The article explicitly mentions 'left student unions' organizing the protest, which indicates a clear ideological alignment with leftist perspectives. The framing focuses on their actions and motivations, suggesting support for their cause rather than neutrality.
Why factuality (60): This article is identical in content to the previous one, simply repeating the same brief mention of left-affiliated student unions organizing a bandh in Telangana. It offers no new information or additional context, limiting its usefulness in evaluating the broader event. Factually, it aligns with
Why objectivity (65): As with the previous article, the tone is neutral, but the lack of substance makes it challenging to evaluate objectivity. It doesn't appear to take a stance, but its repetition of the same information suggests it may be less informative than other reports.
India TodayIndependentConservative5 hr. agoActor Mukesh Khanna has criticized supporters of the NEET paper leak protest, calling them 'cockroaches' and urging them to be 'thrown out'. In a video posted on Instagram, Khanna accused the protesters of using students as pawns in an agenda to destabilize the government. He argued that the protest was not about the genuine issue of the leaked exam papers but rather a coordinated effort to undermine authority. Khanna also condemned the use of abusive language during the protests, claiming that those involved were not truly representing affected students. His comments come amid ongoing controversy surrounding the protests, including allegations of inappropriate behavior by some participants and an FIR filed against a protester for remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the NEET protest as politically motivated and destabilizing, aligning with conservative narratives that view student activism as disruptive and ideologically driven. Khanna’s use of strong, derogatory language ('cockroaches') and his accusation that the protest was 'sponsored' by勢
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
India
