Karnataka Congress chief B.K. Hariprasad has sparked a political controversy after describing jailed activist Umar Khalid as a nationalist while attacking the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) for opposing the screening of a proposed documentary at the National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru. Hariprasad also alleged that the ABVP has no moral standing to criticize Khalid because, according to him, the organization adores Nathuram Godse. His remarks have added a new political dimension to the dispute surrounding the documentary Prisoner No. 626710 is Present.

As per OpIndia reports, the controversy centers on the proposed screening of the documentary, directed by Lalit Vachani, at NLSIU on September 14. The university subsequently postponed the program, citing logistical and security concerns, while stating that the event was not being canceled and would be held later during the current trimester. NLSIU said the postponement was a precautionary measure intended to ensure the safety and well-being of students.

ABVP opposed documentary screening

The ABVP has strongly opposed the proposed screening and has sought intervention from the Center for its cancellation. The organization submitted representations to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Union Education Minister Pralhad Joshi, and Union Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal, while also demanding an inquiry into the NLSIU administration and the process through which permission was granted for the program.

The student organization has argued that institutions of national importance should not become platforms for political propaganda. At the same time, ABVP acknowledged that academic freedom and open discussion are constitutional values while arguing that they must be considered alongside concerns about institutional integrity, national security, and sovereignty.

Umar Khalid’s case at the center of the dispute

Umar Khalid was arrested in September 2020 in connection with the case concerning the larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 Northeast Delhi riots and was booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other provisions. Khalid has denied the allegations, and proceedings in the case remain pending.

The dispute therefore extends beyond the documentary itself, bringing questions of academic freedom, freedom of expression, institutional responsibility, and the portrayal of politically controversial figures into the center of a wider debate on university campuses.

A political row beyond the documentary

Hariprasad’s description of Khalid as a nationalist has intensified the political confrontation, with ABVP and BJP figures challenging the statement and questioning the Congress leader’s characterization. The controversy now involves competing arguments over the limits of campus discourse, the responsibilities of educational institutions, and whether contentious political subjects should be presented through documentary screenings on university campuses.

B.K. Hariprasad’s remarks have drawn sharp criticism, particularly his description of Nathuram Godse as the first terrorist of Bharat while simultaneously calling Umar Khalid a nationalist. How can a senior political leader issue such a sweeping certificate of nationalism to a person accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, especially when the Supreme Court rejected Khalid’s bail plea in January 2026? Defending Khalid in such unequivocal terms, while the serious allegations against him remain before the courts, raises questions about the Congress leader’s priorities, bias, and vote-bank bootlicking politics. At the same time, Khalid remains an accused, not a convicted person, and the final determination of guilt rests with the court.