DU opposes in HC NSUI leader’s plea against his debarment over BBC documentary screening

New Delhi: The Delhi University on Monday opposed in the high court a plea of an NSUI leader against his debarment for a year for his alleged involvement in the screening of a controversial BBC documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots, saying he indulged in gross indiscipline that tarnished the image of a premier educational institution.

The university, in its reply to a petition filed by PhD student and National Students’ Union of India national secretary Lokesh Chugh, said it has acted on the basis of a newspaper report on “banning the BBC documentary”, adding that several people, including the petitioner, had assembled on the campus to screen the documentary in violation of section 144 (issuance of prohibitory orders) of the CrPC imposed by police.

The leader of the NSUI, the students’ wing of the Congress, has claimed in his plea that he was not involved in organising the screening and to his knowledge, there was no prohibition on the screening of the documentary.

But the DU said instead of concentrating on his research, the petitioner was “instrumental in inciting other students and indulging in petty politics”, which was detrimental to discipline and was causing disruption in the university’s academic functioning. The reply said after watching videos, a committee formed after the incident “found that the mastermind of the agitation was the petitioner” and he was seen “actively being part of the unlawful assembly”.

“The petitioner had participated in the ‘showing’ of the banned BBC documentary on 27.01.2023 at 4:00 pm in front of gate number 4, Faculty of Arts, University of Delhi ... which amounts to an act of indiscipline,” the reply filed by the DU said.

“It is denied that the petitioner is a sincere student. The petitioner has indulged in a gross act of indiscipline which has tarnished the image of the university, which is otherwise a premier educational institution in India,” submitted the response as it prayed that the petition be “dismissed at the very outset with costs”.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav listed the matter for hearing on April 26 after he was informed that the reply was not on record and asked the parties to file their written submissions in the meantime.