On November 24, 2025, a peaceful protest against Delhi’s escalating air-pollution crisis at India Gate turned violent after a heavy-handed police crackdown. The protesters, predominantly environmental activists, were demanding immediate action to tackle the city’s toxic air quality, which has reached alarming levels. However, the Delhi Police’s response escalated the situation, resulting in the arrest of 15–22 demonstrators and the filing of charges that included obstruction, assault, and conspiracy. This incident is not an isolated occurrence but rather a continuation of a troubling pattern of state violence aimed at silencing environmental defenders in India.
While the protest began as an environmental call to action, it took a political turn when some demonstrators began to commemorate Madvi Hidma, a tribal Maoist commander killed in a controversial encounter in Andhra Pradesh just days earlier. Hidma, who was hailed as a hero by some tribal activists, became a symbolic figure for environmental and tribal resistance. This protest not only highlights the deteriorating environmental situation in India but also reveals the increasing repression of grassroots activism, especially when it intersects with issues of tribal rights, forest protection, and anti-mining struggles.
The protest at India Gate was primarily focused on the worsening air pollution in Delhi, which has reached record levels, suffocating the city’s residents and causing health problems. Protesters gathered at the C-Hexagon near India Gate, blocking traffic and demanding that the government take urgent action to address the toxic air quality, enforce stricter pollution control measures, and clamp down on industrial and vehicular violations. The protesters, including students from Delhi University and members of environmental groups such as Bhagat Singh Chhatra Ekta Manch and Himkhand collective, sat on the road for nearly an hour.
As the protest went on, police issued repeated warnings for the demonstrators to disperse. However, the protest took a political turn when some of the demonstrators raised slogans in honor of Madvi Hidma. Hidma, who had been killed in a controversial encounter on November 18, 2025, was a symbol of resistance for tribal movements, particularly those opposing forest land acquisition, displacement, and mining activities. The protesters’ decision to raise slogans like “Madvi Hidma Amar Rahe” (Long Live Madvi Hidma) and display posters linking Hidma to tribal environmental struggles invoked the legacy of figures like Birsa Munda, a prominent tribal freedom fighter.
This invocation of Hidma’s name, alongside environmental rights, drew attention to the intersection between tribal autonomy, forest protection, and resistance to state and corporate exploitation of natural resources. The symbolism of Hidma resonated deeply within the tribal-environmental movements, positioning him as an icon for the fight against land dispossession, displacement, and the destruction of natural resources that sustain indigenous communities.
Criminalizing Environmental Protest
The protest, which had initially been peaceful, quickly escalated when the Delhi Police intervened with force. Authorities alleged that some protesters broke through barricades, used chili spray on police officers, and obstructed government work. The police claimed that 3–4 officers sustained irritation injuries due to the pepper spray, which is highly unusual in environmental protests. In total, between 15 and 22 protesters were arrested, and two FIRs were registered for various charges, including assault on police, obstruction of government work, and blocking public pathways.
The use of pepper spray by protesters was highlighted as an extraordinary tactic, which the police portrayed as evidence of a pre-planned conspiracy. However, the violent intervention by law enforcement forces using pepper spray and arresting activists has sparked concerns about the growing criminalization of environmental protests in India. What began as a legitimate demand for cleaner air morphed into a narrative of “insurgency-linked” activities, a common tactic used by the state to discredit and delegitimize protest movements, especially those with tribal and environmental undertones.
Linking Environmental and Tribal Resistance
Madvi Hidma’s legacy as a Maoist commander, despite his association with insurgency, gained relevance within tribal and environmental movements due to his opposition to mining and forest land acquisition, and his defense of “jal, jangal, jameen” (water, forest, land) rights. Hidma’s significance in tribal resistance movements, especially in regions like Bastar (Chhattisgarh) and parts of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, was not merely about his Maoist ideology but about his role in protecting the environment and tribal autonomy against state and corporate encroachment.
The controversy surrounding his death allegedly a staged encounter orchestrated by state forces further fueled the politicization of the protest. Former Bastar MLA Manish Kunjam’s claim that Hidma’s killing was a fake encounter added a layer of complexity to the debate, intensifying political polarization around the state’s treatment of tribal rights and the militarization of forest regions. In this context, the protest at India Gate was not only about environmental issues but also about the broader struggle for tribal autonomy, land rights, and the fight against state-sponsored violence in forest areas.
Violence Against Environmental Defenders
The death of an environmental activist during the police crackdown is part of a larger and deeply disturbing pattern in India. Since 2014, India has become one of the most dangerous countries for environmental defenders, with at least 50 murders between 2015 and 2021. The majority of these killings have been linked to struggles against illegal mining, land acquisition, and forest exploitation. Environmental defenders in India, particularly those who speak out against government policies or corporate interests, are often targeted by powerful political and corporate networks.
Activists like Poipynhun Majaw, Vira Savaliya, Balwani, Shashidhar Mishra, and Satyajit Mohanty have all been victims of suspicious or violent deaths after challenging mining mafias, corrupt power-sector practices, or land encroachments. These incidents underline the systemic failure to protect environmental defenders and the increasing risks they face in their fight for ecological justice.
The targeting of activists, often in collusion with local law enforcement, has created a climate of fear and silence around environmental and tribal rights issues. Despite the grave threats they face, many activists continue to fight for their cause, but the lack of legal protections and the complicity of the state in these killings have severely hindered their efforts.
Securitizing the Tribal-Environmental Discourse
The November 24 protest is not merely an isolated incident but part of a broader trend of the securitization of environmental activism in India. The state increasingly links environmental protests with insurgency and anti-state activities, particularly when these protests involve tribal communities. By portraying protests as “Maoist-linked,” the government is able to justify the use of national security laws, escalate police powers, and crack down on dissent.
This merger of environmental activism with anti-insurgency narratives allows the state to silence dissent on critical issues such as forest exploitation, land acquisition, and mining. Environmental protests are increasingly being framed as a threat to national security, and as such, protesters are subjected to disproportionate force, surveillance, and criminalization. The portrayal of the November protest as a “Maoist sympathizer” gathering is an attempt to delegitimize environmental activism by framing it as part of a larger, more nefarious agenda.
Media and Political Reactions
The government’s response to the protest and its aftermath was swift and coordinated. BJP leaders condemned the protest for creating “anarchy,” and the police framed the use of pepper spray as evidence of a “pre-planned conspiracy.” Several media outlets aligned with the government framed the protesters as “Maoist sympathizers,” obscuring the real issue at the heart of the protest the growing environmental crisis in Delhi. This media strategy shifts the focus away from pollution control and climate justice, instead focusing on delegitimizing the protesters.
The media’s framing of the protest as a threat to national security diverts attention from the genuine environmental concerns raised by the demonstrators. By linking environmental activism to insurgency and anti-state activities, the government is effectively shutting down meaningful dialogue on critical issues of public health, environmental sustainability, and tribal rights.
