Madras High Court Upholds Expulsion of Students Accused of Kidnapping Classmate Under BNS Provisions

The High Court of Judicature at Madras has delivered a significant ruling on the balance between student rights and institutional safety. In an intra-court appeal, the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan upheld the expulsion of two LL.B. students from the Vels Institute of Science Technology and Advanced Studies (VISTAS), following their alleged involvement in a kidnapping case.

Case Background

The dispute originated following the registration of a criminal case at the F2 Egmore Police Station (Crime No. 518/2025) against two students under Sections 140(2) and 142 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The appellants were accused of kidnapping a fellow student of the same institute and demanding a ransom of ₹2 lakhs.

Promptly reacting to these allegations, the Vels Institute issued an expulsion order on July 11, 2025. The students challenged this decision before a Single Judge, arguing that the mere registration of an FIR did not warrant immediate expulsion without a formal inquiry. Upon the dismissal of their writ petition, they moved the Division Bench.

Arguments Presented

The appellants contended that the university’s action was overly aggressive and bypassed standard due process. They argued that the respondent college failed to refer the matter to an internal committee for inquiry, asserting that a criminal charge does not equate to guilt and thus should not serve as the sole ground for termination of enrollment.

Conversely, the Vels Institute maintained that as an educational institution, it has a paramount duty to protect its student body. Counsel for the respondent argued that the heinous nature of the offence and the resulting adverse publicity threatened the institution's reputation and created an environment of fear, justifying an immediate disciplinary response under the college’s code of conduct.

Legal Analysis

The Court’s analysis centered on the university’s " Code of Conduct and Ethics," specifically Clauses 3.3 and 3.4, which mandate academic integrity and prohibit any off-campus conduct that adversely affects the institution's interests or institutional safety. The Bench noted that when students engage in criminal activities that target their peers, the educational environment is fundamentally compromised. The Court emphasized that when the allegations involve such grave infractions, an institution is not required to wait for a criminal conviction to take administrative action necessary to protect its students.

Key Observations

During the proceedings, the Court remarked:

  • "Immediately, on the registration of the crime against the appellants... it is the duty of the respondent college to take action and ensure a free and conducive environment for the students to undergo the course."
  • "The students cannot attend college courses in a state of limbo and fear."
  • "When undergoing the course, if the appellants had indulged in the act of kidnapping another student and demanded a ransom, in view of the gravity of the offence, nothing remains to be enquired by a Committee, when the code of conduct permits expulsion."

Court's Decision

The Madras High Court found no infirmity in the Single Bench's order, concluding that the disciplinary action was proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct reported. The appeal was dismissed, and the expulsion stands. This ruling reinforces the prerogative of academic institutions to maintain campus safety and security in the face of serious criminal allegations, prioritizing the collective well-being of the student population over individual procedural claims.