Follow-up: CURaj Dalit Professor Questions Rajasthan Police Impartiality as ASI Probes Complaint Against His Own Senior Inspector

Ajmer – In a fresh twist to the controversial detention of Dr. Rakesh Kumar, a senior professor from the Department of Physics at the Central University of Rajasthan (CURAJ), the academic has strongly objected to the preliminary police report, raising serious doubts over the fairness of the investigation. Dr. Kumar, who belongs to the SC community, has now approached the Director General of Police (DGP), highlighting how a junior officer, an Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) from the same police station headed by the accused Inspector was tasked with filing a police report on the complaint.

The controversy erupted on 15 April, the day the university was celebrating Ambedkar Jayanti with Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister as chief guest. Dr. Rakesh Kumar, who had politely declined to participate in the event citing date discrepancy and alleged discrimination against SC/ST members by the university administration, was allegedly harassed, threatened, and detained for nearly four hours by police inside the university campus. In his original complaint, he accused Vice-Chancellor Prof. Anand Bhalerao, Registrar Amardeep Sharma, senior police officers including SP Harsh Vardhan Agarwalla and Inspector Dayaram Choudhary, along with other officials, of hatching a conspiracy to silence his voice.

The Rajasthan Sampark portal registered his complaint (Grievance ID: 042606726418292). On 28th April, he received a preliminary police report for this matter which concluded his complaint to be baseless and false.

Inaccuracies and fabricated narratives

In his detailed reply to the preliminary police report, Dr. Rakesh Kumar has pointed out multiple inaccuracies, omissions, and fabricated narratives. He has categorically rejected the report, stating it conceals crucial facts such as the forceful seizure of his mobile phone, throwing of his laptop bag, physical intimidation inside his office, public humiliation in front of students and staff, and the four-hour detention in a room near the Vice-Chancellor’s office.

The professor has particularly objected to the police version that tries to downplay Inspector Dayaram Choudhary’s alleged misbehavior. He has also highlighted factual errors in the report, including the wrong mention of “Mr. Vipin Kumar” as Registrar instead of the current incumbent Amardeep Sharma. Dr. Kumar has questioned how the university administration selectively informed the police about only two professors (including him) while ignoring similar concerns raised by five SC/ST faculty members.

A major point of contention is the conflict of interest in the investigation itself. The preliminary report was prepared by ASI Jitendra Kumar of Bandar Sindri Police Station, the same station where Inspector Dayaram Choudhary serves as the SHO. Dr. Rakesh Kumar has strongly objected to this arrangement, asking how a junior officer can impartially investigate a serious complaint of misconduct, threats, and illegal detention against his own superior.

In his submission to higher authorities, the professor has demanded a neutral probe by an independent agency and has called for the examination of call records and email exchanges of key individuals, including the Vice-Chancellor, Registrar, SP Harsh Vardhan Agarwalla, and Inspector Dayaram Choudhary. He has also renewed his demand for a copy of the original complaint or FIR filed against him, which the police have still not provided.

Dr. Kumar has described the entire episode as a clear case of retaliation because he has consistently raised issues related to academic irregularities, discrimination against SC/ST students and faculty, and the alleged suppression of the sexual harassment case involving a senior professor close to the Vice-Chancellor. He maintains that merely expressing dissent and refusing to participate in a political gathering cannot be treated as a cognizable offence.