IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(NAGPUR BENCH)
V.G. Palshikar V.M. Kanade, JJ.
Rahul Pandurangji Khadatkar others .... Petitioners.
Versus
State of Maharashtra others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 873 of 2001, decided on 20-2-2002.
Advocates appeared :
P.G. Kheole, for petitioners.
Mrs. N.S. Jog, A.G.P., for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
RAGGING - Suspension of Students - Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999, Section 6 - Summary: The court discussed the provisions of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999, particularly focusing on the definition of ragging, penalties for ragging, and the power of suspension of students by the head of the educational institution. The court emphasized the seriousness of ragging and the legislative intent behind the Act to control and end the practice of ragging in educational institutions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, senior students of a polytechnic college, were suspended by the college principal under section 6 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999, for subjecting a junior student to ragging, resulting in physical and mental injury. The petitioners challenged the suspension order in the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were prima facie guilty of indulging in ragging, as evidenced by the charge-sheet filed against them. The court upheld the suspension order, emphasizing the seriousness of ragging and the legislative mandate empowering the head of the institution to take action against ragging.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the suspension order under section 6 of the Act, challenged by the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of section 6 of the Act empower the institutional head to suspend a student prima facie guilty of practicing ragging, without mandating a written complaint to the educational institution. The court emphasized the legislative intent to control and end the practice of ragging in educational institutions.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, upholding the suspension order. The court suggested that the petitioners may approach the institution to reconsider the suspension, considering the time elapsed and the pending prosecution.
2. The facts, giving rise to the instant petition, stated in briefly, are that: the petitioners, who are senior students of the Government Polytechnic College, Gadchiroli, in violation of the provisions of the Act, violated personal sanctity of one Mr. Ravikumar s/o Baliram Dakhane, respondent No. 4 herein, a 19 years old student of the Polytechnic College, by subjecting him to ragging, which resulted in physical and mental injury to the said student, who and his parents complained of about it to the police and the police, after investigation into the matter, have filed charge-sheet in the Court for prosecuting the present petitioners under the provisions of section 323 of Indian Penal Code and other related offences. After having noticed the charge-sheet filed against the petitioners, the respondent No. 3 Principal of the College, issued an order of suspension dated 26-5-2000 under section 6 of the Act, thereby suspending the petitioners. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged the order of suspension in this Court by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. The petitioners seek exercise of this Court's extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 in their favour, who, prima facie appear to have found guilty for having committed criminal offences punishable under the provisions of I.P.C. and involving the moral turpitude. However, talking into consideration the fact that all the petitioners are also the students, notice, why the petition should not be admitted, was issued to the respondents, and in response to the notice, it has been pointed out, both, by the respondent No. 3 institution as well as by the aggrieved student that there does exist prima facie case against the petitioners, as will be evident from filing of the charge-sheet by the police after having carried out investigation into the matter. It was, therefore, submitted, more particularly, by the respondent-State and the respondent-3/college that it is the case of ragging and incidence of ragging having been increased, the Government of Maharashtra was required to legislate the Act to effectively control and bring to an end the fashion of subjecting the newly recruited/admitted students to ragging.
4. The evil of ragging cannot be exagerated the purpose of ragging can never be approved, though we may differ in the origin of ragging, particularly, in educational institutions, imparting education in professional degrees, diplomas or other professional avocations. Usually these courses are of three years and more than that. The courses are very exacting and exciting and requiring serious application of mind and exercise of body. It was, therefore, thought that the student, in the particular course, should live a happy and cohesive life together and, therefore, as a matter of getting themselves introduced to the new entrants, the custom of introducing the old student to new entrants was started and certain obscene questions or obscene actions were required to be undertaken by the fresh entrants to give colour to the entire activity. So this particular unoccupancy and prima facie laudable purpose of getting introduced themselves to or getting familiar with the senior students, since started, then its nature, colour and effect and what is now popularly known as “ragging” was born. In the early days, this ragging was not since fashion, but in the recent past, serious, physical violation were committed by the students indulging in ragging, obscene activities were regularly indulged into, causing serious physical and mental injuries to the new entrants. The ragging was so ramp
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.