The Anti-Ragging Committee of Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU) in Nagpur convened on Tuesday to address allegations involving four students accused of ragging a junior. This meeting transpired four days following the university’s decision to file a police complaint, approximately two weeks after the alleged incident occurred.
According to university insiders, the Anti-Ragging Committee did not conduct an internal investigation prior to the filing of the police complaint. The First Information Report (FIR) was officially registered on July 10 at 10 PM, citing Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, in conjunction with Sections 5 and 8 of the Prohibition of Electronic Cigarettes Act. The complaint was lodged by Professor (Dr.) Vijay Pratap Tiwari and identified four male hostel residents as the accused.
The incident reportedly took place on the night of June 25, when a junior student was summoned to a senior’s hostel room alongside several other juniors. During this meeting, he was allegedly compelled to introduce himself in Hindi, Marathi, and English. The complainant, in his written statement submitted on July 8, alleged that he was forced to perform physical exercises and use obscene language whenever he mispronounced a word. He explained that he initially refrained from reporting the incident due to fears of retaliation from the seniors involved, only coming forward after a fellow student mentioned the episode publicly on July 1.
The complaint leverages Regulation 7 and Regulation 9 of the UGC Regulations on Curbing the Menace of Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions, 2009, as the legal foundation for approaching law enforcement.
Following the police summons and reported temporary detention of the accused students, a significant number of students organized a campus protest against the university’s decision to proceed with a police complaint without conducting an internal inquiry. The demonstration began on the evening of July 11 and extended into July 12, with students contending that the actions taken were excessive and retaliatory.
More Read
Nishant Meshram, the Police Inspector at Bori police station, refuted claims of detention, stating that the proceedings were merely preliminary inquiries involving the issuance of notices to the accused.
In response to student concerns, the university’s Registrar assured that the institution would provide legal support to the students despite the FIR, and emphasized that their academic progress would remain unaffected.
