The Jamia Millia Islamia University student who was shot by a gunman during an anti-Citizenship Act protests on Thursday was discharged from hospital on Friday morning, PTI reported. Shadab Farooq underwent a surgery at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, a friend said.

Meanwhile, the Delhi Police on Friday said they detained and removed students who were protesting against the firing. The students had been protesting outside the police headquarters at ITO since Thursday night, and the police closed the road before detaining and evicting them.

“Due to the demonstration in front of PHQ, the road leading from W point to A point towards Vikas Marg has been closed by local police,” the Delhi Traffic Police tweeted. “Please refrain from using this route.” However, on Friday morning, the traffic police announced that the route was open now.

Jamia Millia Islamia Vice Chancellor Najma Akhtar said the college will bear the medical expenses of the student who was injured in Thursday’s shooting incident, PTI reported.

“All of sudden a miscreant emerged from nowhere brandishing his pistol amid his provoking slogans,” Akhtar said in a statement. “Sadly enough, he opened indiscriminate fire on you [students], injuring Shadab Farooq. We condemn this murderous and brutal act. I also condemn the silence of the police who stood just at a stone’s throw from the miscreant. It speaks volumes about them and has shook our faith in Delhi Police.”

Akhtar added that the students had been very sensible in refusing to retaliate. “The students’ wise act on the day of the martyrdom of Gandhiji is a great and reverent homage to him and to his stupendous moral courage,” she added.

The gunman had livestreamed parts of the protest right before he fired at Farooq. The demonstrators were marching towards Rajghat – Mahatma Gandhi’s memorial – when the incident occurred.

Social media company Facebook on Thursday took down the account of the gunman. Meanwhile, the Opposition parties blamed the Bharatiya Janata Party’s belligerent rhetoric for the man’s actions, even as the saffron party asserted that he was not affiliated to it.