Graffiti News

Graffiti and drawings found in the Arts Division Boys Hostel at Jadavpur University in south Kolkata have triggered a formal inquiry. According to Lokmat Times, the sequence began when West Bengal politician Suvendu Adhikari posted on X on Monday, 24 August 2026, calling for an investigation.

What was demanded

Adhikari described the material as "objectionable, sociopathic, violent and anti-national wall graffiti and drawings" and wrote that "campus premises must not be used as platforms for spreading propaganda and anti-India sentiment". He asked the Vice-Chancellor, the Principal Secretary of Higher Education and other competent authorities to verify the material immediately, identify those responsible, remove the graffiti, and begin administrative and legal action.

The content of the graffiti is not on the public record

What the graffiti actually said is not stated in the report. Lokmat Times carries the characterisations made of it but does not specify the wording or describe the drawings.

That gap is not a small one. Disputes over graffiti are usually conducted after the wall itself can no longer be consulted. Once removal happens first, what remains is competing descriptions from people who saw it, and the argument proceeds against accounts of an image rather than against the image.

The university has convened an inquiry committee

Jadavpur University formed an inquiry committee headed by former Justice Pranab Kumar Chatterjee, with a first meeting scheduled for 27 August. An all-stakeholder meeting was also held with the stated aim of restoring calm on campus.

A retired judge chairing a committee about drawings on a hostel wall is itself an indication of the level at which the matter is being handled.

Students are pressing a separate set of demands

Over the same period, students at the university put their own demands to the administration, Lokmat Times reports: that former Vice-Chancellor Buddhadeb Sau be removed from the chairmanship of the Student Grievance Redressal Cell; that individuals visible in CCTV footage be suspended for the duration of the investigation; and that the inquiry committee be reconstituted to include student representatives. Representatives of the student organisation ABVP left the stakeholder meeting midway, saying representation at it was insufficient.

Why campus walls keep becoming the argument

University walls are, in most countries, the surface where political writing lasts longest. They are easy to reach, the audience is dense and captive, the writing can be unsigned, and — most importantly — what appears there tends to be read as the mood of the institution rather than the opinion of one person. That last property is exactly what makes hostel walls a convenient target for administrators and for politicians outside the university alike.

Which side of this is right is not for Wallscape to settle. The shape of the disagreement is clear enough, though: one position holds that particular expression does not belong on a campus, and the other questions who decides that and through what procedure. The two claims answer different questions, which is why they rarely meet.

Erasure is a decision as well

Removing graffiti is often described as restoration — a neutral act of cleaning. In practice it is a decision. Choosing what comes off a wall carries with it a decision about what is allowed to stay, and that remains true in cases where removal is plainly warranted.

For anyone documenting street art, the practical lesson is narrow and durable: without photographs, what was on a wall survives only as unverifiable memory. Recording work before it disappears is most of what the Wallscape feed and map exist to do.

The inquiry committee holds its first meeting on 27 August.

Source: Lokmat Times