RAHUL PANDURANGJI KHADATKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 26-5-2000, passed by the respondent No. 3 Principal of Government Polythechnic College, Gadchiroli, in exercise of his powers under section 6 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1999 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity, referred to as the Act ).

(2.) THE facts, giving rise to the instant petition, stated in briefly, are that: the petitioners, who are senior students of the Government Polytechnic College, Gadchiroli, in violation of the provisions of the Act, violated personal sanctity of one Mr. Ravikumar s/o Baliram Dakhane, respondent No. 4 herein, a 19 years old student of the Polytechnic College, by subjecting him to ragging, which resulted in physical and mental injury to the said student, who and his parents complained of about it to the police and the police, after investigation into the matter, have filed charge-sheet in the Court for prosecuting the present petitioners under the provisions of section 323 of Indian Penal Code and other related offences. After having noticed the charge-sheet filed against the petitioners, the respondent No. 3 Principal of the College, issued an order of suspension dated 26-5-2000 under section 6 of the Act, thereby suspending the petitioners. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged the order of suspension in this Court by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE petitioners seek exercise of this Courts extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 in their favour, who, prima facie appear to have found guilty for having committed criminal offences punishable under the provisions of I. P. C. and involving the moral turpitude. However, talking into consideration the fact that all the petitioners are also the students, notice, why the petition should not be admitted, was issued to the respondents, and in response to the notice, it has been pointed out, both, by the respondent No. 3 institution as well as by the aggrieved student that there does exist prima facie case against the petitioners, as will be evident from filing of the charge-sheet by the police after having carried out investigation into the matter. It was, therefore, submitted, more particularly, by the respondent-State and the respondent-3/college that it is the case of ragging and incidence of ragging having been increased, the Government of Maharashtra was required to legislate the Act to effectively control and bring to an end the fashion of subjecting the newly recruited/admitted students to ragging.