…not all but some juniors are targeted, as they are perceived as weak, vulnerable and pliant maybe in terms of gender, religion, caste, class and ethnicity. In the case of Aman, it was between modernity and local conservatism. Aman was smart, good looking, having a charismatic personality (won many prizes in the college academic and cultural activities) and, above all, he used to speak English with a tinge of accent (he studied abroad for sometime). All these qualities, particularly the last one, made him vulnerable and weak in the eyes of local goon-students. Being modern and progressive, I realised during my discussion with the medicos there, has its own flip-side, so much so that it renders the putative ‘support structures’ of modern civilised society ‘attack-structures’ for those who dare to think and do things against the conservative mores, culture and lifestyles. [Link]

Amann’s father suggested creation of an anti-ragging database: Centre

Government plans to put in place the mechanism in about a week

New Delhi: The Union Ministry of Human Resource Development has began work on developing a model for the crisis-centre helpline to enable ragging victims across the country to seek immediate help.

Amicus curiae and Additional Solicitor-General (ASG) Gopal Subramaniam gave this information before a Bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and A.K. Ganguly hearing petitions relating to cases of ragging in Dr. Rajendra Prasad government Medical College, Himachal Pradesh, and College of Agricultural Engineering, Bapatla, in Andhra Pradesh.

The two cases were referred to the R.K. Raghavan Committee, which submitted its report to the court. The ASG said the recent incidents of ragging — one in Coimbatore and the other in Goa — had also been referred to the Committee for probe.

The ASG, in his status report, referred to the Raghavan Committee’s findings and said the father of Amann Kachroo had sent a proposal to the government on creating an anti-ragging database.

Mr. Gopal Subramaniam said: “Amann’s father [Dr. Rajendra Kachroo] suggested creation of a database of students and ragging complaints, which will ensure effective monitoring and prevention of ragging. This methodology also involves setting up a crisis-centre hotline, wherein students affected by ragging can call for help.”

The ASG said that “the Ministry of HRD has already commenced work on developing a model for the crisis-centre helpline and the anti-ragging database. The Ministry has sought the assistance of Educational Consultants India Ltd. as a consultant in this project.” He said the government proposed to put in place the mechanism in about a week.

Mr. Gopal Subramaniam said the Ministry, in consultation with the UGC, the MCI, the AICTE and other similar regulatory bodies should set up a central crisis-hotline and anti-ragging database in the manner suggested by Dr. Rajendra Kachroo to the Raghavan Committee and the UGC. “Once the database/crisis hotline is operative, State governments should amend their anti-ragging statutes to include provisions that place penal consequences on institutional heads who do not take timely steps in the prevention of ragging and in punishing those who resort to ragging. .”

Alcoholism

The Raghavan Committee, in its report on the death of Amann, said alcoholism on the campus, failure of college to constitute an anti-ragging squad and implement the recommendations to prevent ragging were the reasons for the incident. It also blamed the MCI for not taking immediate action to put down the menace.

The court posted the matter for Thursday asking the Himachal Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh governments to file their response to the report.

Similar reports:


SC ordered Centre to setup anti-ragging website

Indiaedunews.net, April 21, 2009

New Delhi: The recent incidents of ragging in colleges leading to deaths of the victim or their attempt to commit suicide have instigated government to take a stern step in this matter.

To curb the menace of ragging, Centre has decided to setup an anti-ragging helpline in the form of a website for harassed freshers within a week’s time.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG), Gopal Subramaniam stated this in the Supreme Court on April 20 as the Raghavan anti-ragging committee’s report on Kachroo’s death was presented.

Amann who intimated his parents regularly regarding the trauma he is going through in the hostel had insisted his parents not to take any steps in this matter with the hostel authorities as it may aggravate the situation more.

“This apprehension on the part of Amann led to his untimely tragic death,” the committee’s report said.

Two more incidents of ragging – one in Goa and the other at Coimbatore where attempts were made to spike the eyes of the fresher have also been referred to the Raghavan committee for inquiry.

An anguished bench ordered the Himachal State Government to respond to the report and suggestions of the ASG within two days. The matter has been further postponed for its next hearing on April 23.

No matter whatever may be the response of the BJP government under Prem Kumar Dhumal, the Raghavan report acted as a revelation to many about the atrocities freshers encounter in the medical colleges across India.

The report even criticized the MCI for not taking appropriate steps to enforce implementation of anti-ragging measures in medical colleges.

In the Amann incident, MCI rather acted irresponsibly by handing over the anti-ragging guidelines to the Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College, Tanda, “after the demise of Amann Kachroo over the phone,” the report said.

*

Ragging spirit flows on college campuses

The Indian Express, Prabhakar Rao Voruganti, 21 Apr 2009

NEW DELHI: Rampant alcoholism is responsible for the spate of ragging incidents in the country, Additional Solicitor- General Gopal Subramanium told a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly.

Subramanium told the Bench that a Central agency would be set up in a week as a watchdog to prevent and monitor incidents of ragging in educational institutions.

The concept to set up a Central agency with its website having a helpline is the brainchild of Rajender Kachru, father of Amann Satya Kachru, a first-year MBBS student of a medical college from Himachal Pradesh who died due to ragging last month.

Rajender Kachru has treated the personal tragedy as a motivation for doing social service, Subramanium told the Bench. Appearing as an amicus curie, Gopal Subramanium said that a sub-panel of the Raghavan Committee constituted by the apex court on ragging has come out with this finding.

A press report appeared that the Rajendra Prasad Medical College at Tanda t own in Himachal Pradesh where Aman Kachru died due to ragging, would be closed down.

With that the students exhibited a rare unity and did not divulge much information on ragging saying it was only one rare incident, he told the Bench.

Another reason for the spurt in ragging incidents is that the wardens are living outside the campus and not in the hostels. This has led to unrestrained drinking in the hostels, the amicus curie said.

The sub-committee found that the approach of college managements to such incidents is casual.

*

Alcoholism behind ragging: SC panel

The Tribune, 21 April 2009, R Sedhuraman, Legal Correspondent

“The demon of ragging haunted the juniors persistently in classes, college premises as they were under the continuous wicked vigil of senior students.” This summarises the findings of a Supreme Court appointed inquiry committee that went into the death of Aman Satya Kachroo, a first year student of Dr Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College, Tanda, in Kangra district of Himachal Pradesh, on March 8 this year.

“Alcoholism on the college campus is the main reason that generated violence leading to the serious form of ragging that was seen in the Aman episode.” This was the near unanimous response from all quarters (college administration, teachers, non-teaching employees, students, civil authorities, police authorities and the public), the committee said in its report.

The report, read out before a Bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat, has held a whole lot of people responsible for not checking ragging — right from the Chancellor (Governor), down to the level of the Vice-Chancellor, the Principal, the district administration, police and students, both seniors and juniors. Even the security guard at the hostel was found wanting in his duty.

The voluminous report, the operative part of which runs into 22 pages, has suggested appointment of full-time wardens at college hostels with appropriate communication facilities. The apex court Bench, which also included AK Ganguly, posted the next hearing for April 23.

The inquiry committee, which comprised Dr AK Agarwal, Dean, Maulana Azad Medical College, and Dr Rajendra Prasad, Principal, Ramjas College (both in Delhi), had associated Tanvir Aeijaz, Assistant Professor of Ramjas College with it.

Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium, who is amicus curiae in the case, apprised the court of the report, while senior counsel Altaf Ahmed and Bimal Roy Jad represented the HP government and Aman’s father, Prof Raj Kachroo.

The Governor being the Chancellor of Himachal Pradesh, to which RPGMC was affiliated, and the Vice-Chancellor were responsible for monitoring incidents of ragging in the colleges, but there was no monitoring cell at these levels.

“Had the activities of RPGMC, Tanda, or other institutions in the state been monitored at the Chancellor’s level, the scenario would have been completely different. The VC was expected to seek weekly reports from its affiliated institutions/colleges, which was also not being done.”

The attitude and role at the university and state levels towards the issue of curbing the menace of ragging was “rather casual”. Also, the role of the Medical Council of India (MCI) was rather “strange and irresponsible as is evident from the fact that the guidelines framed by them were made available to RPGMC, Tanda, after the sad demise of Aman Kachroo.”

*

A Supreme Court panel, constituted to probe into the ragging and subsequent death of medical student, Amann Kachroo, has blamed rampant use of alcohol in institutions for a spurt in ragging incidents.

The panel comprising Dr. A K Agarwal, Dean, Maulana Azad Medical College, and Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Principal, Ramjas College has also indicted the administrative staff of Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College (RPGMC) for Kachroo’s death. The first year student succumbed to injuries inflicted on him by his seniors during a ragging session in the hostel on March 8.

The panel has further sought immediate inquiry against suspended college principal Dr Suresh Sankhyan for failing to implement Supreme Court directions against ragging. Keeping the “seemingly violent history” of RPGMC in mind, it has urged the court to post police on the campus until the college administration manages to enforce discipline.

According to the panel the college’s anti-ragging committee never met and its staff were not even sensitised to the menace of ragging. “The college administration could not properly bring about a stable and disciplined atmosphere in the college,” the report stated.

While reading out contents of the “shocking report” before a special bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat, additional solicitor general (ASG) Gopal Subramanium said there was an immediate need to introduce de-addiction measures at educational institutions.

Subramanium, who is assisting the court in the matter, suggested constitution of a special committee having eminent psychiatrists or psychologists, a documentary-maker and an educationalist, to recommend urgent and mandatory mental health measures to be implemented at all the education institutions including schools.

The ASG said the committee should also immediately examine the problem of alcoholism on RPGMC campus and suggest immediate de-addiction measures. The court was also informed about the panel’s finding against the role of Medical Council of India (MCI). The panel has raised doubts over MCI’s sincerity in curbing ragging in medical colleges and sought a probe into it.

*

Amann was ragged to death by drunk seniors

Hindustan Times, Bhadra Sinha, 21 April 2009

A Supreme Court panel, constituted to probe into the ragging and subsequent death of medical student, Amann Kachroo, has blamed rampant use of alcohol in institutions for a spurt in ragging incidents.

The panel comprising Dr. A K Agarwal, Dean, Maulana Azad Medical College, and Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Principal, Ramjas College has also indicted the administrative staff of Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College (RPGMC) for Kachroo’s death. The first year student succumbed to injuries inflicted on him by his seniors during a ragging session in the hostel on March 8.

The panel has further sought immediate inquiry against suspended college principal Dr Suresh Sankhyan for failing to implement Supreme Court directions against ragging. Keeping the “seemingly violent history” of RPGMC in mind, it has urged the court to post police on the campus until the college administration manages to enforce discipline.

According to the panel the college’s anti-ragging committee never met and its staff were not even sensitised to the menace of ragging. “The college administration could not properly bring about a stable and disciplined atmosphere in the college,” the report stated.

While reading out contents of the “shocking report” before a special bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat, additional solicitor general (ASG) Gopal Subramanium said there was an immediate need to introduce de-addiction measures at educational institutions.

Subramanium, who is assisting the court in the matter, suggested constitution of a special committee having eminent psychiatrists or psychologists, a documentary-maker and an educationalist, to recommend urgent and mandatory mental health measures to be implemented at all the education institutions including schools.

The ASG said the committee should also immediately examine the problem of alcoholism on RPGMC campus and suggest immediate de-addiction measures. The court was also informed about the panel’s finding against the role of Medical Council of India (MCI). The panel has raised doubts over MCI’s sincerity in curbing ragging in medical colleges and sought a probe into it.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I.A. No. _____ OF 2009

IN

CIVIL APPEAL No. 887 OF 2009

IN THE MATTER OF:

University of Kerala      …Appellant

Versus

Council of Principals of Colleges & Others   …Respondents

AND IN THE MATTER OF:

A.A. Rahim        …Appellant

Versus

Council of Principals of Colleges & Others   …Respondents

AN APPLICATION FOR DIRECTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE AMICUS CURIAE

It is respectfully submitted:

1. On 16^th March, 2009, the Amicus Curiae filed I.A. No.15 of 2009 complaining about the death of Amann Satya Kachroo, a student who was pursuing the professional studies in MBBS at Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.  This Hon’ble Court on 16^th March, 2009 took the said application on board and passed an order as per minutes.

1. It is submitted that as far as the affidavits filed by the Registrar, Government Agriculture Engineering College, Bapatla; Director General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh; Chief Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh and the Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh in the Agriculture Department are concerned, they admit that one Ms. N. Triveni, B. Tech. First Year student attempted to commit suicide by consuming hair dye.  On account of medical attention, she was saved.  It may be noted that the incident took place on 27^th February, 2009.  It may also be noted that this Hon’ble Court was pleased to pass an order seeking an explanation upon the application of the Amicus Curiae on 16^th March, 2009.  In the affidavit filed by the Registrar, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad a statement is said to have been narrated by Triveni to her father on 12^th March, 2009.  It is further described that the father lodged a complaint with the Bapatla police against plan of her seniors and thereafter an offence under Section 309 IPC was altered to Section 4(1)(ii), (iii) read with Section 7(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997.  It is interesting to note that the Ladies’ Hostel Warden made a complaint without setting up the full facts of the case and a case was actually registered against Triveni vide FIR No.48/2009 under Section 309 IPC.  It is also interesting to note that it was after this Hon’ble Court was pleased to intervene in the matter on 16^th March, 2009, that Ms. Triveni stood discharged from the hospital on 20^th March, 2009.  It may also be pointed out that the Registrar claims that the said five accused girls were suspended on 13^th March, 2009.  It is stated in the said affidavit that the criminal case is now under investigation.  The said affidavit, while affirmed on 27^th March, 2009, gives only bare details pertaining to the follow up of the enquiry in relation to the five accused girls and is silent as to whether any steps have been taken to expel the said girls from the institution.  It is further submitted that the affidavit of the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh has based itself entirely on the investigation record and report of the Superintendent of Police, Guntur District.  It may be pointed out that although the investigation of the case was taken out on 28^th February, 2009, the case which was obviously attempted to be set up in collusion with the Hostel Warden was that the victim was depressed.  It is also interesting to note that the Sub Inspector of Police did not record the statement of the victim from 27^th February, 2009 upto 13^th March, 2009.  In fact, it was the father of the victim who submitted a petition stating that his daughter had regained her consciousness and had written down the names of the person who had ragged her.  It is stated that the police altered the memo and added Sections 4 and 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997.  It may be interesting to note that the section relating to abetment of suicide was, however, not added.

1. It is respectfully submitted that in a matter of this kind, investigation cannot and should not take very long and a charge sheet should be submitted before the competent court at the earliest. In fairness, the Director General of Police took charge only on 23^rd March, 2009. He is, however, silent on the status of the investigation as on the date of the filing of the affidavit, that is 27^th March, 2009.  The affidavit of the Chief Secretary of the State of Andhra Pradesh sets out the relevant provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997 and reference to the punishments under Section 4 of the Act.  It may be noted that under Section 7(1) of the Andhra Act, it is stipulated that if the head of the educational institution fails to expeditiously enquire into the complaint of ragging or neglects to suspend the students in the circumstances, such person would be deemed to have abetted the offence and shall be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.  It is important to note that neither the Principal nor the Hostel Warden is being charged under Section 7(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997.  It is also relevant to note that even though detailed guidelines have been framed by the Government as early as on 31^st August, 2006 and 9^th November, 2006, in reality, teachers and administrative staff do not ensure that the institution is free of ragging.  The Principal Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh in the Agriculture Department states in her affidavit that a high level committee was constituted to conduct a detailed enquiry and to submit a report.  However, the status of the enquiry by this high level committee is not clearly depicted.
2. In the meanwhile, as far as the Himachal Pradesh case is concerned, the father of Amann Satya Kachroo, Dr. S. Kachroo, has attempted to initiate a civil society movement against ragging.  The said Dr. Kachroo has made available information to suggest that Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College has been seriously afflicted with the scourge of ragging.  It is learnt that in 1999, a 2^nd year student, Vishal Chandel, was beaten up and kept inside the hostel for three days.  The case was deliberately not reported and hushed up.  It is also reported that the relatives of the victim met the Health Secretary of the Government of Himachal Pradesh who informed that 33 students have been expelled.  In fact, no action was taken against the accused.  It is also further reported that a show cause notice was issued to Dr. Sankhayan, who was the incumbent principal of the said medical college when the Amann Kachroo incident took place.

1. It is also learnt that in 2002 in the same institution, a student by the name of Neeraj was found dead in the hostel and the postmortem was conducted in a hurry and the matter was closed.  Dr. Sankhayan was the Hostel Warden at the time.  In 2004, a junior student was stabbed in his stomach with a broken bottle and none of the guilty persons were brought to book.  In 2006, four students were compelled to drink alcohol and were beaten up. They were taken in a bus and dropped 53 miles away.  The bus met with an accident.  No action was taken even though one of the students became disabled.  The said Dr. Sankhayan reportedly hushed up the matter.

1. It also appears that the students of the said medical college have not restricted their violent activities to the college campus.  Allegedly, the students have beaten up a shopkeeper, that is, one Shyam Sunder in 1998.  The incident was reported to the police yet no action was taken.  In 2004, the students beat up people in the local Ram Lila Maidan with iron rods and bamboo sticks and yet the college did not take any action against the students.  In 2006, the students barged into a marriage party at a place called Maror, where they beat up people and yet no action was taken.  In 2006, the students damaged the college canteen and the owner Naresh Soni suffered physical injuries, yet no action was taken.

1. It is also learnt that the Additional District Magistrate, Kangra has completed his magisterial enquiry on 28^th March, 2009.  The magisterial enquiry, it is reliably learnt, has come to the conclusion that ten incidents of ragging and acts of indiscipline have taken place in/since 2001.  It is also reported that the college authorities acted in a casual manner.  It is submitted that the said report be directed to be brought on record.

1. It is in these circumstances that the Applicant herein prays to this Hon’ble Court to direct as follows:
   1. a CBI enquiry be conducted into the affairs of the said Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College;
   2. Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College be directed to restrain Dr. Sankhayan from discharging any functions until further orders;
   3. an enquiry be conducted against the said Dr. Sankhayan by the State Government of Himachal Pradesh under the chairmanship of a retired Judge of this Hon’ble Court or of a Hon’ble High Court at the earliest;
   4. the State of Himachal Pradesh be called upon to submit an explanation into the circumstances in which the said Dr. Sankhayan was appointed as the Principal of Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College;
   5. the University Grants Commission, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, as well as a panel of three eminent doctors to determine the criteria for selection as Principals of Medical Colleges as well as a similar committee of three eminent engineers to suggest how Principals of Engineering Colleges should be selected;
   6. grant prayer in terms of the constitution of a special committee consisting of three eminent psychology/psychiatrists to evolve mental health guidelines in relation to ragging which would later be incorporated in the school curricula, public media distribution as well as counseling centres for parents;
   7. infrastructural facilities be provided to  Raghavan Committee including a secretariat;
   8. an online  database be set up by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India or through a joint initiative between the Union Government as well as an NGO (public private partnership) to maintain a website including gathering all relevant information pertaining to ragging, and to create a web page on the internet, which would:

• (i)store relevant details / particulars of students;

• (ii) which would include a statement from the Principal of the concerned college/institution undertaking that he/she will ensure and undertake all possible steps to prevent ragging;

• (iii) play videos of ragging so as to educate the public of the dangers of ragging;

• (iv) have an interface facility, wherein students would be able to make complaints in respect of ragging incidents;

1. 1. UGC and Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India to establish a call centre at Delhi, as a pilot measure, so that anybody would be able to access the call centre and complain about incidents of ragging;
   2. the Raghavan Committee to frame a simple and transparent procedure for penalizing institutions which permit ragging on their premises/campuses, as well as steps to be taken against administrative heads including quick and transparent procedures for expelling students.
   3. the Andhra Pradesh police, and specifically the Superintendent of Police of District Guntur, to complete the investigation into Ms. Triveni’s case within a period of thirty days from today and file a charge sheet in the court of competent jurisdiction against the accused persons, should an offence be made out;
   4. the committee appointed by the Andhra Pradesh government to complete the enquiry in relation to incident of ragging of Ms. Triveni and proceed to act in accordance with law and take such punitive action including expulsion of the students from the institutions; and
   5. any other order(s) this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

Filed by:

Dated:       .3.2009    (GOPAL SUBRAMANIUM)

AMICUS CURIAE

This time the defenders of ragging are silent. Who knows, maybe some of them have changed their views and are now lighting candles at Jantar Mantar. There are no TV debates calling ragging fun. This time no one is arguing that a murder case should not be used to defame the socially productive ‘tradition’ of ragging. This time nobody is asking how boys will become men unless they are ragged, and nobody is calling the victims sissies.

What has changed? Have the chickens come home to roost? DPS, Gurgaon, Kashmiri Pandit — have the defenders shut up because the victim was a ‘person like us’? Is that all it needed, the life of a metro-bred boy rather than a small-town loser? Has the debate, that should have been settled with the Supreme Court’s 2001 ban, finally been settled 8 years and two dozen deaths later?

It sounds crude but it’s true: Aman Kachroo was lucky to be murdered than forced to commit suicide like most others. Had he committed suicide, the world would have been blaming him rather than his seniors. Nine out of 10 ragging suicides are by freshers who hang themselves from the ceiling fan of their hostel room, rarely leaving a suicide note. In all these cases, the victim is blamed. Must be depression. Exams? Relationship? Family discord? But since Aman was literally lynched to death, the standard template can’t be used this time.

Ragging continues because society at large wants it to continue despite legal injunctures. In an essay where he recounts ragging in Delhi University, Amitav Ghosh writes, “There were nights when we slept in drainpipes around Pandara Park rather than go back to college to face our seniors.” The rest of the essay convinces you that had it not been for ragging he wouldn’t have become the writer that he is!

That’s the manner in which selective amnesia is applied. Such mythmaking is then reflected in TV debates, newspaper features, and in the portrayal of ragging in films such as Munnabhai MBBS. The images you get to see are not of young bodies hanging from fans, eyes bulging and tongues popping out, but those of day-scholars singing and dancing in the canteen.

The most important arena of legitimising ragging is the oral passing-on of stories of parents to children, from alumni to students. A practice that teaches you to submit, to be subjugated and humiliated rather than to refuse orders becomes a ritual.

And so it is that when a student commits suicide, the first response of many is that if hundreds of other students in their same hostel didn’t commit suicide, why did this one? The ensuing victim-blaming makes sure ragging survives. The media’s focus on ragging ‘cases’ rather than the everyday goings-on in hostels also makes sure that the cases are seen as exceptions. The student who drops out, or becomes mentally unstable, or is ostracised by his/her hostel community for complaining are not highlighted. Even the family and peers begin stereotyping them as ‘shy’ and ‘timid’.

In 2002, Anoop Kumar committed suicide in a Lucknow college because his parents won’t let him drop out and return home to Kanpur. He had told his parents that he couldn’t even tell them what he was being subjected to. It was the shame of sexual abuse. It’s amazing that a society that does not approve of homosexuality looks the other way at sexual ragging. His parents regretted their stubbornness just as Aman’s parents regretted not taking their sons protestations seriously.

The regret of Aman’s parents is just as well the regret of the defenders. For the first time, contempt notices have been issued to principals and the University Grants Commission is pretending to wake up. The evidence is so strong that the four seniors could make history by being the first to be convicted of ragging death. Most of all, when a new government comes to power, it will hopefully look into the Raghavan Committee’s 50 recommendations and, at the very least, amend the Indian Penal Code to make ragging an offence.

(An edited, shorter version of this article by me appeared this past Sunday in the Hindustan Times.)

Aman Satya Kachroo, left-most, in his school days. Photo by Vaibhav Chhabra via Facebook

Before he died of brain haemorrhage (and not cardiac arrest as the papers incorrectly claimed), Aman Satya Kachroo wrote a note about who beat him up. In the note he named the four accused who are all now in jail. The note reads like a dying declaration and is signed by 12 witnesses. It seems unlikely that even one of the 12 witnesses will have the courage to say in court that they saw the lynching happening before their eyes. Even as they came down to Gurgaon for the cremation, they must have been getting calls from their parents, ‘Beta, just say you didn’t see anything. Why get into these court hassles and potential threats from the families of the accused?’

Even so, the evidence against the four is probably the strongest ever and with the state government determined to punish the accused, it is only a matter of time before they are given rigorous imprisonment. They evidence may not have been so strong had Rohit Dhar, Aman Kachroo’s uncle who reached there as soon as he was informed of the death, allowed Dr Suresh Sankhyan to conduct the post-mortem and write the crucial post-mortem report. Sankhyan who? Same gentleman who happened to be the principal of the college, the same gentleman who didn’t take action over the repeated ragging complaints from freshers! Having presided over a fresher’s death, he wanted to write the post-mortem. Well, because this was the only medical college in Tanda. Mr Dhar must be lauded that even in a state of grief he had the presence of mind to drive the body to Dharamshala and made sure three doctors did the post-mortem.

However, the police in Kangra have another problem at hand. They don’t mind arresting the Suresh Sankhyan, but they don’t know what provision of the law they can do so under! The Supreme Court said in 2001 that principals will be held responsible for not being able to curb ragging, but in 2009 the Himachal Pradesh police don’t know under what provision they can arrest former principal Sankhyan. This is a classic example of how Public Interest Litigation is not, is NOT, a substitute for legislation, notification of laws and setting up a due legal procedure from the police station upwards. That’s not at all a fault of the courts though – why doesn’t Himachal Pradesh have an anti-ragging law? Actually, it did pass an ordinance in 1992 and has elapsed since no one bothered to pass it as a law. The ordinance had a provision against principals and wardens who do not curb ragging: jail for six months. If only this ordinance had back then been made into a law, Sankhyan could have been arrested and a strong message sent out to obstinate Principal types across the country whose wont it is to think that they are the law.

That is the story of anti-ragging legislation at the Himachal Pradesh level. At the central level, a hitherto unreported fact has emerged, which is that the Supreme Court of India did ask, orally, the central government to pass an anti-ragging law in the ongoing suo moto PIL. This was reported yesterday in the Indian Express by Manish Chibber:

…the Union Human Resource Development Ministry has never shown eagerness to come up with a law at the national level.

The Home Ministry too didn’t act on a suggestion of the Supreme Court which, in May 2007, wanted a section to be added to the Indian Penal Code (IPC), making ragging a punishable offence…

…a bench of the apex court had said that apart from ragging, abetment to ragging, criminal conspiracy to rag, causing injury, wrongful confinement, use of force, assault as well as sexual offences should also be included in such a section of the IPC. It also wanted the burden of proof in ragging cases to lie on the accused — not the victim.

[...]

Sources in the Home Ministry said that “preliminary discussions” were held on an anti-ragging law after the apex court ruling but “nothing concrete” followed as senior Ministry officials felt that the Supreme Court guidelines were “adequate in dealing with the problem.” The issue was also discussed with state governments to elicit views and to push them to bring about their own anti-ragging laws. Other than a few states like Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal, most don’t have anti-ragging laws. [Link]

So we have a bizarre situation where the Supreme Court wants the Government to to amend the IPC to make ragging an offence, but the Government feels the Supreme Court orders are enough. Will these lazy bureaucrats please hang their heads in shame?

And not just in the home and HRD ministries but also in the states. The RK Raghavan committee mentions in its report that while seven states have so far passed anti-ragging laws, only two, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have notified them. In other words, Maharashtra, Kerala, West Bengal, Assam and Chhattisgarh have not even cared to notify their laws, so they remain pieces of paper. This is the height of bureaucratic indifference. So many bureaucrats, so many governments, have been this efficient.

The committee report also notes, “In terms of the purpose of the various State laws, we find that other than the Chhattisgarh Act, no other State legislation is intended to prevent ragging – the others only seek to prohibit.” See pages 21 and 22 of the report, as well as the tabulur analysis of the seven state laws in pages 182-183 (2 MB .pdf file here).

We need an all-India anti-ragging law. The Parliament of India has to pass it. NOW.

*

There’s a candlelight vigil, be there or elsewhere:

Location: Jantar Mantar, Delhi
Time: 5:00 PM to 8:00 PM
Date: Satarday, 14th March

(Cross-posted at Kafila.)

*

Update: Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, who is I think the amicus curae in the ongoing case, says he will ask the Supreme Court to take note of the case and charge the Principal and Vice-Chancellor with “contempt, inaction, negligence and failure.” But who will charge whom for lack of implementation of the SC orders on ragging?And Himachal Pradesh has an anti-ragging ordinance too. (The ordinance had expired in 1998, I gather, as it had nott been turned into a law within six months)

*

I don’t know why this report does not use the word lynching, because that is what seems to have happened at the Dr Rajendra Prasad Medical College, Tanda.

I hope I am not committing contempt of court here by mentioning that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had first banned ragging in May 2001. Eight years and two Supreme Court-appointed committees later, the celebrated Public Interest Litigation method of reforming India did not come to the rescue of Aman Satya Kachroo. (It is not clear whether he spelled his surname as Kachroo or Kachru.)

What the Supreme Court process did do, instead, was to make the state governments and the HRD Ministry lazy; they gave up passing and implementing anti-ragging laws. The few states that did, most of them, as the Raghavan committee shockingly found, have not notified them!

The Union HRD Ministry has also not taken any steps to either pass a national anti-ragging law or amend the Indian Penal Code to make the “ragging” a punishable offence.

The problem, as always, is that of implementation. The SC’s 2001 order, based on the Unnikrishnan committee report (.pdf here) had said that it is the responsibility of college principals and directors to check ragging. That’s where the buck stops. But the order had not specified what it would mean to not follow that responsibility! What happens to a principal in a case like this, where he was clearly and deliberately negligent? Under what law do you charge him?

Secondly, the order had said that it would be the responsibility of affiliating/funding agencies to make sure colleges affilaited to or funded by them are following anti-ragging measures. Even today there arev colleges, even in Delhi University, who do not follow the details of the 2001 SC order, such as forming an anti-ragging committee in college and making it accessible in person or through phone at any time of day and night. You can read what seems like an excellent order here; the loophole here is that since the measures mentioned sounded illustrative they weren’t taken seriously. Most importantly, nobody ever asked UGC et al as to what they had done to implement the order.

But these affiliating and/or funding agencies – mainly three: UGC (University Grants Council), AICTE (All India Council for Technical Education) and the MCI (Medical Council of India)- didn’t do much apart from notifying the institutions under them about the SC order. Many secretaries came and went, students kept dying of ragging, some cases of rape and alleged murder even, and finally in 2007 the Supreme Court again took suo moto notice of the fact that ragging was still on!

This time the SC set-up a committee headed by former CBI chief RK Raghavan. In the second meeting of the committee, they invited me along with a few people to make presentations, and subsequently hired some of us as consultants. I remember going on and on in my presentation that the problem was implementation, and if only the first committee’s recommendations and the ensuing SC order of 2001 were implemented in letter and spirit, there wouldn’t be the need for this committee. I remember the first question I was asked after my presentation was about the need of an all-India anti-ragging law to be passed by the Parliament. I said absolutely. This was the single-most important thing that was needed. Everyone agreed. Although everything that makes for ragging is covered by the Indian Penal Code, the police does not think this way.

The committee submitted its report in May 2007 (.pdf here). The illiterate Delhi media took a copy of the recommendations chapter of the report and hyped it as though it had already become the law of the land. The problem that the illiterate media faced was that there were 50 recommendations! The committee had put in almost everything they had been suggested. So every paper/TV channel highlighted some of the recommendations. Some missed out the most crucial one – that the IPC should be amended and ragging made a cognisable offence. This would mean that a fresher like Kachroo can go to a police station and be taken seriously about a ragging complaint – if you know what Indian police is like you can imagine how they tell freshers not to fear, everyone gets ragged, it is okay.

The Supreme Court has not said anything about this particular recommendation so far, and those against law-by-PIL would say that it should not. The HRD ministry, and state governments, are mum on the question of outlawing ragging and implenting and monitoring anti-ragging measures because they hink that the Supreme Court, like god, is taking care of it. Why increase our work?

So what the Supreme Court has done this time round is issue this order:

(1) The punishment to be meted out has to be exemplary and justifiably harsh to act as a deterrent against recurrence of such incidents.

(2) Every single incident of ragging where the victim or his parent/guardian or the Head of institution is not satisfied with the institutional arrangement for action, a First Information Report must be filed without exception by the institutional authorities with the local police authorities. Any failure on the part of the institutional authority or negligence or deliberate delay in lodging the FIR with the local police shall be construed to be an act of culpable negligence on the part of the institutional authority. If any victim or his parent / guardian of ragging intends to file FIR directly with the police, that will not absolve the institutional authority from the requirement of filing the FIR.

(3) Courts should make an effort to ensure that cases involving ragging are taken up on a priority basis to send the correct message that ragging is not only to be discourages but also to be dealt with sternness.

(4) In addition, we direct that the possibility of introducing in the educational curriculum a subject relating to ragging shall be explored by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and the respective State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT). This aspect can be included in the teaching of the subjects “Human Rights”.

(5) In the prospectus to be issued for admission by educational institutions, it shall be clearly stipulated that in case the applicant for admission is found to have indulged in ragging in the past or if it is noticed later that he has indulged in ragging, admission may be refused or he shall be expelled from the educational institution.

(6) The Central Government and the State Governments shall launch a programme giving wide publicity to the menace of ragging and the consequences which follow in case any student is detected to have been involved in ragging.

(7) It shall be the collective responsibility of the authorities and functionaries of the concerned institution, and their role shall also be open to scrutiny for the purpose of finding out whether they have taken effective steps for preventing ragging and in case of their failure, action can be taken; for example, denial of any grant-in-aid or assistance from the State Governments.

(8) Anti-ragging committees and squads shall be forthwith formed by the institutions and it shall be the job of the committee or the squad, as the case may be, to see that the Committee’s recommendations, more for particularly those noted above, are observed without exception and if it is noticed that there is any deviation, the same shall be forthwith brought to the notice of this Court.

(9) The Committee constituted pursuant to the order of this Court shall continue to monitor the functioning of the anti-ragging committees and the squads to be formed. They shall also monitor the implementation of the recommendations to which reference has been made above.

[The full interm order is here.]

This was in an interim order of the Court in May 2007, nearly 2 years ago. That has not been able to prevent Kachroo’s murder. I have no doubt that more ragging deaths will take place. You can read here a critique of the interim order by me.

If only Aman Kachroo had been able to call a helpline number or email somebody, anonymously, and write that this kind of ragging was going on, and a fact-finding team had immediately visited his college, not only could the death have been prevented but also possibly Kachroo could have enjoyed his college life without even the mandatory ostracisation that freshers who speak up against ragging have to face in their college and hostel. The setting up of such a helpine on the model of Childline was one of the recommendations of the Raghavan committee. But can the Supreme Court set up something like that? Surely, that is the domain of the executive and not the judiciary. An HRD Joint Secretary is Member Secretary of the Raghavan Committee, but the HRD won’t do anything because, well, the SC is looking into it.

To model the helpline around Childline was suggested by HRD Joint Secretary Sunil Kumar himself, but that would need identifying and funding NGO’s to do that. The Coalition to Uproot Ragging from Education is ready, but the HRD forgot about this and the SC had no comment.

So two things needed to prevent ragging: a law and a helpline. Simple.

*
So what should Kachroo’s family do, to get justice for his death and also to contribute to the larger anti-ragging cause to prevent such deaths?

1) I think it is important that they hire a good criminal lawyer and sue the Principal, Suresh Sankhayan, on criminal charges. In at least one case that I know, the director of the educational institution was arrested. Don’t know what happened thereafter. It is important that negligent Principals be put behind bars; it will drive home the point to principals and institute directors that even if they personally think ragging is okay, the law does not think so.

2) Another party to be sued in this matter is the Medical Council of India, whose responsibility it is under the Supreme Court orders (both 2001 and 2007) to disaffiliate institutionsthat are unable to curb ragging. This implies that they have to go around checking, and they haven’t done that.

3) It is obvious that the seniors who lynched Kachroo to death have to be given exemplary punishment. But it reminds me of the case of Pon Navrasu of Annamalai University in 1996. The then Vice Chancellor’s son, his body was hacked into many pieces by a senior named John David. Given 36 years’ jail by a sessions court, he was freed by the High Court for want of evidence. Evidence is a big problem in ragging cases, and the only conviction we know of was a ragging-rape case recently. This was achieved after a lot of hardship, and six were even then acquitted. That’s why it’s important to have a good lawyer and to collect evidence pronto.

4) In the Kerala case, controversies over which led to the SC taking notice of the prevalence of ragging despite the 2001 ban, the Kerala Nursing Council had de-recognised the School of Medical Education, where the rape had taken place after an exam in the name of ragging. This is the only example of de-affiliation. This is important, and Kachroo’s parents should push for this in the case of Dr Rajendra Prasad Medical College, Tanda. Students who are studying there and are not involved in ragging should be accomadated in other medical colleges. This is a price that institutions must pay for not being able to curb ragging. They must be dissolved altogether, as is the case with hazing in the US where fraternities and sororities unable to end hazing are just shut down.

*

Apart from this legalistic discussion, I have to say that part of the blame goes to Aman Kachroo’s family itself, even if this is the wrong time to say this, because like typical Indian parents they didn’t take his ragging complaints seriously. If even a ragging victim’s family does not take the issue seriously until he dies, you can imagine how seriously society at large thinks of ragging as a problem. Let it also be said that they are not the first parents who will always rue their indiscretion, and perhaps not the last.

(Cross-posted at Kafila.)