A controversy has emerged at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) over the alleged naming of student leader Amzad Ali, popularly known as Amjad Siwan, in a criminal case related to an incident at RM Hall.
Amzad has claimed that he was falsely implicated and that his name was included in the case despite his claim that he was at Dr BR Ambedkar Hall, where he resides, when the alleged incident took place.
The issue has gained attention after affidavits submitted by the complainant and a witness before the AMU Proctor’s Office allegedly claimed that pressure was used to name Amzad in the case.
Affidavits Allege Pressure
According to Amzad, copies of the affidavits were submitted to the Proctor’s Office under Application No. 4618/Proc at around 8:40 pm on September 7.
An affidavit attributed to complainant Haris Faheem allegedly states that he was pressured by an official to name Amjad Ali in connection with the incident.
The witness affidavit also allegedly states that the witness did not know Amzad to have been present at the place of occurrence and that his name was included under pressure.
The contents of the affidavits have not been independently verified. If authenticated, they could become relevant to establishing how Amzad’s name came to be included in the case.
CCTV Footage Key to Defence
Amzad has maintained that he was not present at RM Hall when the incident occurred and was instead at Dr BR Ambedkar Hall.
He has sought the preservation of CCTV footage from the relevant locations, saying the recordings could provide evidence of his whereabouts and movements.
He has also sought access to the CCTV records through the Right to Information process.
The footage could therefore play an important role in determining whether Amzad was present at RM Hall or at his hostel at the relevant time.
Suspension Order Sent Within 82 Minutes
The timing of the university’s disciplinary action has also become a point of contention.
Amzad said the complainant and witness affidavits were submitted to the Proctor’s Office at around 8:40 pm on September 7. He said the suspension order was communicated to him by email at around 10:02 pm, approximately 82 minutes later.
He has questioned whether the documents, CCTV related material and other evidence could have been examined within that period before the suspension order was issued.
Amzad has also criticised the late night communication of the order, calling the timing inappropriate.
Student Activism Becomes Part of Dispute
Amzad has been involved in student related issues and has raised questions about university administration through RTI applications, complaints and legal proceedings.
He has also been associated with an “Anti Suicide Movement” focusing on issues affecting students.
Amzad alleges that his activism and criticism of the university administration have made him a target and that the present case is an attempt to silence him.
He is also among the petitioners in a case concerning alleged encroachment of land associated with the AMU Riding Club before the Allahabad High Court.
Evidence Needed to Establish Facts
Being named in a criminal case does not by itself establish guilt. The allegations against Amzad, as well as his claims of false implication, remain subject to investigation and verification.
The complainant and witness affidavits, CCTV footage, university records and other evidence could help establish whether Amzad was present at the alleged place of occurrence and how his name came to be included in the case.
