$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 12636/2025 & CM APPL. 12470/2026 NADIA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhik Chimni, Ms Pranjal Abrol, Mr Gurpal Singh, Mr. Ayan Dasgupta Samarendra Ms Moksha Sharma, Advs.

versus DR B R AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mohinder Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal, Ms. Aishwarya Malhotra&

Ms. Tripta Sharma, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 13.03.2026

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:

“a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ/Direction/Order quashing the Impugned Order dated

27.06.2025 passed by the Respondent University; AND b. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ/Direction/Order quashing the Impugned Order dated

11.08.2025 passed by the Respondent University;

c. Pass such further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the captioned Petition;”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a student in the respondent University. The present controversy arises fromserious allegations by a student enrolled in Global Studies at the respondent University, being subjected to severe ragging, bullying including derogatory, vicious and gender insensitive remarks, which had driven the student to self-harm. The petitioner lodged complaints and protests which led to the suspension of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner filed a writ petition bearing W.P. (C) 4177/2025 titled Anan Bijo & Ors. v. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University challenging the suspension order dated 05.03.2025, in which vide order dated 15.04.2025, this Court permitted the petitioner to attend classes but in the meantime directed the petitioner not to take part in any protest. The said direction are reads as under:

“8. However, petitioner is directed that he shall not take part in any protest or demonstration, directly or indirectly, with regard to the incident being enquired into. Further, it is expected that the petitioner will maintain discipline in the campus.”

4. Thereafter, as per the respondent the petitioner participated in another campus wide boycott led by AUDSC as a result of which the respondent issued a show cause notice dated 27.05.2025, wherein the petitioner was put to notice as to the participation in a protest in violation of the order dated 15.04.2025 of this Court. Hence, a breach of student code of discipline. The petitioner duly replied to the said notice on 03.06.2025, wherein the petitioner explained that the petitioner holds the highest regard for the orders passed by this Court and did not participate in any protest and she was merely present at the protest site to meet a friend during which a photograph of her had been clicked by the security.

5. The aforesaid formed the basis of the impugned order dated 27.06.2025, which reads as under:

6. The order dated 16.04.2025 passed by the Proctorial Board of the respondent university in furtherance of the order dated 15.04.2025 reads as under:

7. The petitioner has been expelled as a disciplinary measure for participating in a sit down protest. In the present case the act of the respondent University, i.e. penalisation of a sit down protest is wholly untenable in law. It strikes at the very heart of spirit of democracy and freedom of speech and right of peacefully assembly protected under the Article 19 (1) (a) and (b) of the Constitution of India

8. In Ramlila Maidan Incident, In Re (2012) 5 SCC 1 the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated the right of peaceful protest and the relevant paragraph read as under:

“295. The right to peacefully and lawfully assemble together and to freely express oneself coupled with the right to know about such expression is guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Such a right is inherent and is also coupled with the right to freedom and liberty which have been conferred under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

9. In Mazdoor Kisa