The students were allegedly involved in the theft of various items such as chocolates, pens, and desk lamps, among others, from stalls within the college campus, the five students claimed they believed the items were abandoned at the stalls.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Panaji, Goa: The Bombay High Court at Goa has quashed the suspension of two Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Goa students, instead ordering them to perform community service. This decision comes after the students were allegedly involved in a theft incident on their college campus.
Also read-Comment On Wife’s Cooking Skills Do Not Amount To Cruelty: Bombay High Court (lawchakra.in)
Vuribindi Mokshith Reddy and Karri Kishore Ramachandra Reddy, aged 18 and 19 respectively, along with three others, were caught stealing items such as chocolates, pens, desk lamps, and more from campus stalls. Initially, all five students faced severe penalties, including being debarred from registration during semester I (2023-24) and two additional semesters. While the penalty for the three other students was later reduced to a fine of ₹50,000, the two petitioners faced continued suspension and the fine.
The two students approached the Bombay High Court, challenging the harshness of their punishment. The Goa division bench of the High Court, led by the Chief Justice, expressed disappointment with the institute’s director and senior professor for refusing to modify the punishment. The bench noted,
“The prime reason for not being merciful or for almost ignoring the reformative aspect, so clearly emphasised by the UGC guidelines, was the apprehension that students would seek Court intervention against the Institute’s decision and such Court intervention would undermine the disciplinary systems of the Institute. To say the least, this should not have been the approach of the Director, particularly when dealing with two 18-year-old students from his Institute.”
The High Court criticized the director’s approach, stating,
“We almost got the impression that the Director was irked by the fact that these two petitioners had dared to seek Court intervention against his decision… though we are hurt by this approach of the Director of an Institute of Eminence, we refrain from saying anything more because we are mindful that the two petitioners before us have to complete their education with the respondents for the next few years and not be scarred for life due to the indiscretion or even indiscipline indulged by them on this one occasion.”
Acknowledging that courts usually do not interfere with the quantum of punishment imposed by disciplinary authorities, the High Court felt compelled to intervene in this case. The bench stated,
“The Institute cannot claim any immunity from judicial review. The institute has to explain the deviation from its own guidelines and cannot simply rely upon some unfettered discretion claimed by its director in such matters.”
Consequently
“undertake community service for a period of two months and for two hours each day,”
which they agreed to do at a nearby old age home.
This ruling by the Bombay High Court marks a significant shift towards reformative justice in educational institutions, emphasizing the need for disciplinary actions that contribute to the personal growth and social responsibility of students. The decision to replace suspension with community service highlights the court’s preference for constructive and educational responses to student misconduct.
