Armed with an air gun, chemicals, and a lighter, 38-year-old Rohit Arya demanded ₹2 crore in unpaid dues for government school projects. He released a video threatening self-immolation and harm to hostages if Education Minister Deepak Kesarkar didn’t intervene. After failed talks, commandos breached the studio, rescued all 20 unharmed, and shot Arya in the chest. He died in hospital.

Critics slammed the lethal force as excessive and avoidable. Former IPS officer Sudhakar Suradkar questioned the lack of a trained negotiator, asking why Arya wasn’t subdued alive if he only fired in the air. Social activist Aftab Siddique blamed political ego and inaction, saying Kesarkar should have spoken directly to de-escalate. Retired ACP Arvind Patil argued non-lethal options existed to capture Arya and probe his financial distress. They fear the real cause—systemic neglect—will now be buried.

Defenders praised the police for decisive action under pressure. Ex-encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma called the action justified self-defense, citing chemical threats to children. Retired DGP Praveen Dixit said officers had no choice when Arya fired at them. A senior officer, speaking anonymously, said the operation prevented future crises and sent a strong message against child endangerment. They insist saving innocent lives was the only priority.

Also Read: Gaza Survivor's Nightmare Memoir: "They Ate Like Kings While We Starved!"

Legally, police can fire only in self-defense or to prevent greater harm. The death will face a mandatory magisterial inquiry under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Mumbai’s last encounter was in 2010, when an extortionist was killed. This case revives debate over force, mental health, and systemic neglect of grievance-driven individuals. Was Arya a desperate victim—or a deadly threat requiring elimination?

The incident highlights deeper issues in grievance redressal. Arya claimed unpaid dues for projects like “Majhi Shala, Sundar Shala” and “Swachhta Monitor,” adopted by the government. Officials deny formal contracts, calling his work voluntary. Yet his desperation points to gaps in support for social entrepreneurs. As the inquiry begins, the question remains: could dialogue have saved a life, or was lethal force the only way to protect 17 children?

Also Read: Mumbai Hostage Crisis: How 17 Kids were Lured into a Fake Audition Trap