LexTHE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA versus THE COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS OF COLLEGE IN KERALA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2009] 1 S.C.R. 99 THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA v. THE COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS OF COLLEGE IN KERALA & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 887 of 2009) FEBRUARY 11; 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.) A B Education/Educational institutions - Ragging in C educational institutions -Report of Committee - On consideration thereof, direction issued to States, Union Territories and University to act in terms of the guidelines formulated by Committee - MCI, BC/ in consultation with UGC to frame requisite regulations - Students to be informed of D the said guidelines as also consequences flowing from not observing the same - As regard giving opportunity to offender before taking action, delay would frustrate the case. Ragging - Meaning of - Held: Ragging cannot be E considered as abridgement between seniors and freshers, whereas 'introduction' could be considered as genesis of relationship between the two - Ragging in essence is a human rights' abuse - It is a form of systematic and sustained physical, mental and sexual abuse of fresh students at college/university/any other educational institution at hands F of senior students - Ragging means causing, inducing, compelling or forcing student, by way of practical joke or otherwise, to do any act which detracts from human dignity or violates his person or exposes him to ridicule or to forbear from doing any lawful act, by intimidating, wrongfully G restraining, wrongfully confining, or injuring him or by using criminal force to him or by holding out to him any such threat. Vishwa Jagriti Mission through President v. Central 99 H 100 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 3 S.C.R. A Government through Cabinet Secretary & Ors. AIR 2001 SC 2793, referred to. Everyman's Encyclopaedia 1938 Edition, Vol. II; Random House Dictionary of the English Language 1967 8 Edition, referred to. Case Law Reference: AIR 2001 SC 2793 Referred to. Para 2, 11 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No 887. C of 2009. D From the Judgment and Order dated 24.6.2004 of the High Court of Kerala at Erankulam in W.P. No. 30845 of 2003. R. Satish Advocate for the Petitioner. E.M.S. Anam, K.R. Sasiprabhu, M.K. Michael, M.K.D. Namboodiri, S.M. Jadhav, T.V. George, Shail Kumar Dwivedi, V. G. Pragasam, K.H. Nobin Singh, R.S. Jena, Ajit Kumar Sinha, P.V. Dinesh, R.C. Kohli, S. Chandra Sekhar, Gopal E Singh, A.A. Choudhary, Maninder Singh, Anil K. Jha H.K. Puri, L.R. Singh, Himanshu Shekhar for the Respondents. F The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Ragging in educational institutions has been a matter of concern for this Court since long. Noticing that notwithstanding a judgment of this Court in Vishwa Jagriti Mission through President v. Central Government through G Cabinet Secretary & Ors. (AIR 2001 SC 2793) few remedial practical measures have been taken to prevent the menace of ragging in educational institutions, by order dated 27.11.2006, a Committee was constituted under the chairmanship of Mr. R.K. Raghvan, Ex-Director, C.B.I. The Committee has H UNIVERSITY OF KERALA v. COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS OF 101 COLLEGE IN KERALA & ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] submitted its report and suggested certain measures. A Subsequently orders dated 16.5.2007 and 10.12.2007 were passed. Further Status report has been submitted by Shri Gopal Subramanium, learned Amicus Curiae. Pursuant to the directions given by this Court, the second and third reports of the Committee have been filed which read as follows: B "SECOND REPORT: The Committee under the chairmanship of Dr RK Raghavan met at New Delhi on the 2nd April 2008 to take stock of the situation and review the progress made by different authorities, agencies and C other stake holders who had been directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to implement the recommendations of this Committee's Report on ragging and also of the Lyngdoh Committee on elections to student unions. 2. On the 10th December, 2007 the Supreme Court had D heard the matter and had passed certain orders. Accordingly, on 4-1-2008, the Ministry conveyed to all the regulatory institutions like UGC, AICTE, MCI, DCI, PCI, INC and ICAR, the observations of the Court and its directions that in the prospectus of the higher educational institutions E it should be mentioned that if any incident of ragging comes to the notice of the authority concerned, the accused student will
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.