The Bombay High Court grants relief to law students accused of multiple cases of sexual harassment

While disposing of a plea filed by a final year law student of Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), challenging the decision of the varsity to expel him from the institution after he was found guilty of ‘repeated’ by the internal complaints Sexual Harassment of Girls Committee (ICC), the Bombay High Court on Thursday said that the expulsion of the student for an ‘indefinite’ period would result in his ‘academic death’.

A division bank of Judges Atul Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil held that referring the dispute back to the Vice-Chancellor of the MNLU would lead to a third round of litigation (the first of which is the second round), and thus the petitioner student and also the complaining girl both should not be subjected to further distraction from their academic activities.

“In our view, an indefinite and indefinite deportation order would be harsh and would result in the ‘academic death’ of ‘X’ (petitioner). It would result in taking away the education and training he has undergone since his admission to the course in In fact, he would never receive the BA in the future. Be able to complete LLB (Honours) course at MNLU. All this would also have a drastic effect on a student’s academic life resulting in deprivation and denial of education. In our opinion, the consequences resulting from an indefinite and indefinite deportation order are drastic and harsh. observed the bank.

The court noted that even after disqualifying the petitioner, the Vice Chancellor allowed him to appear for the ninth and tenth semester examinations but withheld his results from the outcome of the pending proceedings.

“Normally, ‘X’ would have completed his BA.LLB (Honours) course by the end of the 2023-2024 academic session. That did not happen because his results for the past two semesters were not announced.the bench noted while limiting the expulsion orders for one academic year.

It further imposed ‘community service’ on the petitioner for the entire academic year 2024 to 2025, under the leadership of the VC, who has been instructed to announce the results of the petitioner after completion of the community service.

“This would result in ‘X’ receiving the penalty of expulsion for one academic year and also providing community services until the end of the current academic year. The loss of an academic year on these facts would, in our opinion, be proportionate to the misconduct of ‘X’. It would put him one year behind his entire 2019-2024 streak and he would be unable to engage in any other academic activity during that period. This approach should not be understood as the result of an exercise in fairness but an exercise in applying the doctrine of proportionality, taking into account the indefinite period of deportation.” the judges reasoned.

The petitioner through senior advocate Mihir Desai had challenged the June 21, 2024 order of the MNLU Vice Chancellor (VC) expelling him from the varsity based on ICC sexual harassment findings. The petitioner is said to be a ‘repeat’ sexual harasser as he has been accused of sexually harassing several college girls within a span of two years.

In his plea, the petitioner-student has submitted that he has an excellent academic record. He argued that the entire investigation process (in this second ‘official’ case of sexual harassment) was ‘flawed, biased and contrary to the principles of natural justice’. He further claimed that the alleged incident took place outside the university premises during an ‘unofficial’ meeting and therefore the ICC or the university had no ‘jurisdiction’ to deal with the complaint. It was submitted that such punishment would become a ‘death penalty’ for the petitioner.

Appeared for the complainant girl, senior counsel Navroz Seervai assisted by advocate Pooja Thorat, highlighted the fact that the petitioner is a ‘repeat offender’ and has ‘molested several girls’ within a span of two years. The senior lawyer pointed out that even in 2022, the petitioner faced an investigation by the ICC following another complaint filed by another girl, who was also sexually harassed by the petitioner. The report of the first incident states that a young woman, who was sexually harassed by the petitioner, was “so badly traumatized” that she could not muster the courage to file an official complaint against him.

The judges, therefore, based on the principle of proportionality, upheld the expulsion for one academic year only, as opposed to the ‘indefinite’ period imposed by the varsity.

Furthermore, the court ordered the MNLU to consider the ICC’s recommendation in its report dated May 20, 2023 regarding the venue of events, such as in the present proceedings, which noted that a moot court competition was organized in a private lounge annex bar.

“The Vice Chancellor is requested to consider the recommendations of the ICC in its report dated May 20, 2023 regarding the selection of a venue for such activities of the MNLU, and to undertake due diligence that no alcohol is served during dinners on such occasions and take corrective action in the larger interest of the MNLU, its staff and its students,” is in the 49-page order.

Appearance:

Senior advocate Mihir Desai along with advocates Abhijit Desai, Karan Gajra, Mohini Rehpade, Daksha Punghera, Vijay Singh, Sachita Sontakke, Digvijay Kachare and Abhishek Ingale, instructed by Desai Legal, appeared for the petitioner.

Senior advocate Navroz Seervai along with advocates Gulnar Mistry, Pooja Thorat, Amar Bodake, Trisha Choudhary and Madhav Thorat represented the complainant girl.

Lawyers Dr. Uday Warunjikar, Jenish Jain, Dattaram Bile and Aditya Kharkar represented the MNLU.

Case title: X vs. Maharashtra National Law University (Writ Petition (File) No. 21030 OF 2024)

Click here to read/download the judgment