Over two months after Noida’s industrial belt witnessed violent protests, the Uttar Pradesh police have now filed chargesheets in four FIRs – 163, 164, 165, and 169.

Among the evidence: a children’s library inauguration described as a planning meeting, Palestine solidarity posters logged as incriminating recoveries, a man formally accused of “Marxist ideology”, and a WhatsApp instruction to protect members’ privacy logged as proof of intent to commit “some anti-national act”.

According to the chargesheets, the violence caused losses of around Rs 3,000 crore. Police claim that about 60 vehicles were burnt, 59 companies were damaged through vandalism and stone-pelting, and industrial units remained shut for several days.

Across the four chargesheets filed, investigators allege a consistent theory: that the violence was not the outcome of an escalating labour protest but the culmination of a carefully planned conspiracy orchestrated by a small group of left-wing activists and labour organisers.

Newslaundry examined all four chargesheets to understand how investigators constructed this conspiracy case and the evidence they rely on to support it.

Four days of 'improper demands'

According to the chargesheet in FIR 163, workers from several factories began protesting and blocking roads on April 10 over what police described as “improper demands”.

The “improper demands” referred to by the police included increases in the minimum wage, double overtime, and weekly offs, among others.

Police said attempts to negotiate with the protesting workers failed, following which, “On 11 April, a crowd of approximately 1,500 to 2,000 workers blocked the main Dadri Road and, in front of Noida Special Economic Zone (NSEZ), delivered inflammatory speeches and incited the demonstrators to violence, upon which the crowd of agitators began causing a nuisance.”

The workers, police claim, “began vandalising private property at various places in the area, pelting stones at the police, assaulting them, hurling abuses and threatening to kill them, as a result of which several police personnel sustained injuries.”

It was at this stage that investigators, relying on statements of company owners, first alleged the involvement of activists and labour organisers – among them Aakriti Choudhary (a theatre practitioner), Srishti Gupta (a visual artist), Manisha Chauhan (a factory worker), Rupesh Roy (an auto-rickshaw driver) and Aditya Anand (a software engineer) – around whom much of the case centres.

The chargesheet reads, “several company owners stated that Rupesh Roy, Aditya Anand and others named therein were involved, and stated that Aakriti, Srishti, Manisha, Rupesh Roy, Aditya Anand and their other associates, under a pre-planned scheme, committed criminal misconduct and turned the workers’ agitation into a violent agitation.”

While referring to the arrest of Aakriti, Srishti and Manisha, the police repeatedly cite the location of their arrest as Sector 39 at the Botanical Garden metro station, from where Srishti had started a live video on April 11 at 7 pm, claiming the three were being “abducted” by the UP Police. 

While the violence peaked on April 13, the allegation that a handful of activists orchestrated the unrest became the organising principle of all four chargesheets. As the investigation moves from FIR 163 to FIR 169, the police narrative expands from claims of “inflammatory speeches” to allegations of planning meetings, WhatsApp networks, ideological mobilisation, foreign funding and an organised criminal conspiracy.

Across the four chargesheets, police invoked 26 provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with provisions of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act. The charges span offences relating to rioting (BNS 191(2)), criminal conspiracy (BNS 61(2)), attempt to murder (BNS 109), assaulting a public servant (BNS 121(1)), damage to public property (BNS 324(4)) and other serious allegations, with the exact combination of sections varying across the four FIRs.

Taken together, the varying combinations of offences expand the prosecution’s case from allegations of violence during the protests to an alleged organised criminal conspiracy.

The anatomy of a ‘plot’

According to the chargesheets, preparations for the violence allegedly began nearly three weeks before workers took to the streets.

The chargesheet for FIR 169 traces the alleged conspiracy to March 22, when a library inauguration organised under the banner of the Bhagat Singh Yuva Kendra at the house of a Karawal Nagar resident, allegedly doubled as a planning meeting.

The chargesheet states that Aditya, Rupesh, Satyam Verma (a Lucknow-based journalist and translator), Aakriti, Srishti, Manisha and other associates connected with the Revolutionary Workers Party of India (RWPI) and “with Maoist/communist ideology” were present at this programme.

The library event itself was public. Photographs uploaded on the Bhagat Singh Yuva Kendra’s Facebook page show the inauguration taking place in Karawal Nagar. Besides several of the accused, dozens of children can also be seen attending the programme.

One of the activists named in the chargesheet told Newslaundry, “In April, dozens of policemen came to the library with a search warrant. They filled their sacks with our pamphlets. They haven’t come since. Two days ago, we had a summer camp for kids there.”

It further alleges that another meeting took place on April 1 at Aditya’s rented accommodation in Arun Vihar, Noida, where the “outline” of the agitation was prepared. Investigators say call detail records place several of the accused at these meetings and describe Karawal Nagar as the “principal planning and coordination centre” of the agitation.

The chargesheet alleges that after these meetings, the organisers mobilised workers through an extensive network of WhatsApp groups, social media platforms and printed pamphlets.

At the centre of the alleged digital campaign is a WhatsApp group named ‘Richa Global’. According to witness statements reproduced in the chargesheet, workers were added to the group by Aditya and Rupesh. Strike calls, videos critical of management and messages urging workers to unite allegedly circulated there in the days before the unrest. One worker told investigators he had received the group link on April 10. Another claimed that organisers regularly visited factory gates and asked workers to join the agitation.

One witness named Mangal, who has been relied on in other FIRs as well, told the police, “I heard from some workers that persons named Satyam Verma and Himanshu Thakur had also come among the workers and, under the conspiracy, were doing the work of inciting them.”

Recovered: Banners, newspapers, and posters

Search warrants executed against Himanshu Thakur (an activist who recently graduated from Delhi University) recovered a laptop, two tablets, a headphone, two spiral notebooks, three personal diaries, a labour-union card, an RWPI card, a student-organisation membership card, pamphlets relating to the strike, seven small and large banners, 184 back issues of the Mazdoor Bigul newspapers, Kopal magazine, and five books.

From the office of Satyam, the police recovered “a hard disk, four CPUs, three pen drives, seven chequebooks, three laptops, a register, receipts of four donations, three pen drives.” Similarly, at Aditya’s house, the police seized three pen drives, a router, a basic phone, books on Maoism and Communism, pamphlets, pages of a handwritten diary, Mazdoor Bigul newspapers, posters related to Palestine, and labour-code pamphlets.

Across all four chargesheets, the police also devote considerable attention to the ideological background of the accused and their organisations.

The chargesheets trace the accused’s association with organisations including RWPI, Bigul Mazdoor Dasta, Naujawan Bharat Sabha, Disha Students’ Organisation, Stree Mukti League and Jan Chetna, while recounting their participation in labour campaigns, anti-CAA protests, student demonstrations and other movements dating back several years.

A line in the chargesheet for FIR 163, for example, states: “Accused Satyam Verma is accused of Marxist ideology and wishes to give strong recognition to RWPI (Revolutionary Workers Party of India). Copies of Mazdoor Bigul newspaper were also recovered from his office.”

It was only a couple of weeks ago that the Supreme Court, while hearing a petition alleging custodial torture of Aditya and Rupesh, stated that holding or following ‘leftist’ ideology is not a crime in India.

Meanwhile, during the police custody remand of Aditya, police claimed that 35 sticks, 30 iron rods, 6 litres of petrol, 5 litres of thinner, 10 dupattas, and 12 glass bottles were recovered based on his alleged disclosure.

The chargesheet for FIR 163 repeatedly cites Marxist ideology, membership of left-wing organisations and the recovery of political literature as part of the alleged conspiracy. It does not explain how they are connected to the planning or execution of the violence.

Further, the police also regularly calls the use of social media for circulating protest calls or ideological posts as “misuse” and “propaganda”. 

The chargesheet contends that more than 20 social media groups carrying over 300 “violent” messages were used to execute the conspiracy. The chargesheet for FIR 164 additionally alleges that pamphlets were prepared and circulated before the protests to mobilise workers, while another accused, Yogesh Meena (a Delhi University law student), is alleged to have circulated audio messages, videos and WhatsApp chats encouraging workers gathered outside Motherson Company premises on April 13.

The investigation also alleges that the agitation was financially supported. According to the chargesheet for FIR 164, Rupesh Roy allegedly distributed Rs 40,000 among workers before the protests, while four accused workers later told investigators they had each received Rs 10,000 from him to participate in the rioting.

The chargesheet further scrutinises the finances of several accused. Investigators claim that Satyam’s bank account received dozens of foreign transactions amounting to $56,845 (Rs 54.10 lakh) and, elsewhere, refer to approximately Rs 1.12 crore allegedly transferred into his account. The dates of those transactions, however, appear only in a case diary, which shows they spanned almost two decades – from 2005 to 2023.

The chargesheet reads, “It is alleged that this accused receives funding from abroad in US dollars, pounds, euros, etc., and distributes it among workers to provoke violent agitation. His remand in this case was obtained by the investigating officer. On the basis of the investigation and evidence collected so far, intentional arson by the accused persons was found proved. Therefore, Section 326(F) BNS was added.”

The case diaries go further still. Case Diary 16 in the FIR 163 chargesheet records what police describe as Rupesh Roy’s disclosure statement, alleging an underground network moving hawala money through Nepal under Satyam Verma’s oversight, with finances kept so secret that “even if you and your cyber team spend months investigating, you will not be able to identify the sources.” Such statements are generally inadmissible as evidence except to the limited extent they lead to the discovery of new facts.

Meet the ‘conspirators’

A journalist, editor and translator based in Lucknow, Satyam Verma is 61 years old and has spent nearly two decades with UNI Varta. He has edited Bhagat Singh aur Unke Saathiyon ke Sampurna Uplabdh Dastavez, translated works by Balzac, Upton Sinclair and Romila Thapar, and has long been associated with Janchetna Books and Jagruk Nagrik Manch.

Aditya Anand, 28, is a software engineer from Hajipur, Bihar, and an NIT Jamshedpur graduate. Alongside his corporate job, he has volunteered on community initiatives in Noida, including a campaign to secure electricity connections for low-income homes.

A 44-year-old auto-rickshaw driver from Kulesara in Greater Noida, Rupesh Roy has been active in labour organising and neighbourhood campaigns, among them a push for regular electricity supply in informal settlements.

Aakriti Choudhary, 25, is a theatre practitioner from Durgapur, West Bengal, and an MA History graduate from Delhi University. She belongs to the Progressive Artists’ League and has worked on street theatre, workshops and campaigns involving women workers.

Srishti Gupta, 26, is an artist from Amethi, Uttar Pradesh, who holds an MFA from Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, and works across multiple visual art forms. Like Choudhary, she is part of the Progressive Artists’ League, and has documented social movements through her artwork while conducting workshops in low-income neighbourhoods.

Manisha Chauhan, 22, is a factory worker originally from Bihar who was employed in Noida at the time of her arrest. Police rely heavily on WhatsApp chats involving her in their case, alleging she helped mobilise workers ahead of the protests.

Himanshu Thakur, 24, is from Kashipur, Uttarakhand, and holds an MA in History from Delhi University, where he was preparing for his PhD entrance examinations. He contested the 2023 Delhi University Students’ Union presidential election as a member of the Disha Students’ Organisation and has been active in campaigns around different issues.

The youngest of the accused, 23-year-old Yogesh Meena, is a law student at Delhi University’s Campus Law Centre and an alumnus of Shri Ram College of Commerce. Also with the Disha Students’ Organisation, he contested the 2025 Delhi University Students’ Union election and has taken part in student campaigns against paper leaks and fee hikes. Meena was the latest to be arrested in the case, picked up on May 30.

What the case diaries actually say 

While the chargesheets repeatedly refer to more than 300 “violent” messages circulated across over 20 social media groups, the case diaries reviewed by Newslaundry reproduce only a handful of chats.

One exchange, allegedly recovered from Aakriti’s phone, shows Manisha and another activist discussing adding workers’ phone numbers to WhatsApp groups and collecting videos from Motherson, Richa Global and other protest sites. 

Another message allegedly posted by the same activist in the “Disha” WhatsApp group claims that police were preparing to carry out arrests “in very large numbers” and were “intimidating people sitting peacefully”. It goes on to say that “it is the police that is acting illegally” and urges recipients to “reach in large numbers” to oppose what it describes as illegal police action, asking them to record the police presence on video.

Case Diary 27 in the FIR 163 chargesheet relies heavily on digital evidence to reinforce the conspiracy theory. Investigators analyse the call detail records (CDRs) of several accused to place them in Noida during the protests.

For Satyam, however, the police go a step further. Based on his CDRs, investigators infer that after arriving in Delhi on April 5 he “explained the entire plan” of the agitation to Rupesh, Aakriti, Srishti, Aditya, Himanshu and Manisha.

The diary does not reproduce any call recordings or messages containing such instructions; the conclusion is drawn from the pattern of communications and locations.

The case diary also reproduces portions of WhatsApp and Telegram chats from a group called “Bigul Media”. According to the police, members discussed mobilising workers, generating invite links to add more participants, sharing strike-related videos, asking supporters from Delhi to gather outside Phase-2 police station after the arrests of Rupesh, Aakriti, Manisha and Srishti, and encouraging them to call the Noida Police demanding their release.

One exchange reproduced in the diary is also cited by the police as evidence of secrecy. After a message asked members to contact workers from Gurugram and Manesar, a participant replied that people should not mention anyone’s name in the group and instead share only phone numbers. The diary interprets this as an attempt to conceal identities as part of the conspiracy. “This gives the impression that these people wanted to conceal their identities so that they could carry out some anti-national act,” the case diary reads.

However, the chats reproduced in the case diary themselves largely concern coordinating protests, expanding communication networks, sharing videos and seeking support for those arrested.

Moreover, certain witness statements in Case Diary 28 in the FIR 163 chargesheet are nearly identical in their wording. The accounts given by Richa Global’s HR manager Abhishek Singh and security supervisor Anil Kumar, for instance, mirror each other closely. Both state that there was “no problem” in the company until April 9, when two workers – Bhupendra alias ‘Bhupi’ and Satish alias ‘Siddharth’ – had joined an agitation group allegedly created by Rupesh in the name of Richa Global, and that “loyal workers” informed them that Bhupendra had accepted money to mobilise more workers.

Notably, neither witness claims to have personally seen money being distributed. Instead, both attribute the allegation to information received from other workers. 

Across four FIRs, the chargesheets construct an elaborate conspiracy involving planning meetings, ideological organisations, financial transactions and digital communication. Yet many of the documentary extracts reproduced in the case diaries consist of mobilisation efforts, protest coordination, appeals for solidarity and police inferences drawn from call records, while direct documentary instructions to carry out violence are far less visible.

Responding to the allegations laid out in the chargesheets, here’s what Kawalpreet Kaur, an advocate representing some of the accused, told Newslaundry:

“The case advanced by the Noida Police is legally unsustainable on two independent grounds. First, the prosecution is vitiated by serious procedural irregularities. The records relating to the arrest contain material inconsistencies, including discrepancies regarding the place of arrest, which is shown as being different from the actual location, as well as contradictions in the dates and sequence of events. 

“Second, the chargesheets impermissibly conflate constitutionally protected democratic mobilisation with an alleged anti-national criminal conspiracy. Activities such as demanding an increase in the minimum wage, organising workers, and participating in public protests have been portrayed as components of a larger conspiracy to commit violence. However, they fail to identify any specific overt act of violence attributable to the accused. Instead, they rely on an expansive and vague theory of conspiracy that seeks to subsume lawful political organising within its ambit without establishing the essential ingredients of the alleged offence.”

The eight accused have now been named in 11 FIRs. Two of them – Satyam Verma and Aakriti Choudhary – are also detained under the National Security Act. Meanwhile, one of the principal demands that triggered the protests was eventually accepted: after the unrest, Uttar Pradesh increased minimum wages by roughly Rs 2,500.

Complaining about the media is easy. Why not do something to make it better? Support independent media and subscribe to Newslaundry today.