Was Amity student harassed? Supreme Court to examine matter
The Supreme Court will look into the suicide of Amit law student Sushant Rohilla to examine if he took the extreme step due to any harassment by the college authorities or teachers.delhi Updated: Sep 05, 2016 21:26 IST
The Supreme Court will look into the suicide of Amit law student Sushant Rohilla to examine if he took the extreme step due to any harassment by the college authorities or teachers.
A bench headed by Chief justice TS Thakur requested senior advocate Fali S Nariman to assist the court in the matter.
When Amity’s counsel, senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra, tried to defend the college, the bench, also comprising Justice YV Chandrachud, said: “There are allegations that he was deliberately withheld, as the teacher was not pleased with him.”
The court issued the order after taking cognisance of a letter written to the CJI by Rohilla’s friends, who alleged the college authorities drove the 19-year-old to hang himself.
Luthra said Rohilla did not have the mandatory 75 per cent attendance as per Bar Council of India rules. “He had only 43%. This included the extra 15% given because he participated in various programmes on behalf of the college. Still he was short of attendance,” Luthra added.
On August 10, Rohilla committed suicide at his Delhi house after his college reportedly denied him permission to write his exams. His friends and family members protested against his death and held the college responsible.
Luthra blamed the parents for Rohilla’s alleged indiscipline. “Repeated e-mails were sent to the father that he had not attended classes and was short of attendance. He was aware of it and did not care,” the senior counsel said.
The bench said the boy was an adult and wondered if the parents could do anything in the given situation. Luthra informed the court that 18 students were not given their hall tickets, besides Rohilla. “They all have been asked to join the next year,” he said.
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who was present in court for another matter, said institutions had forgotten to be kind. “There is an obligation on institutions to be kind,” he remarked.
But the CJI observed: “A hypersensitive person may commit suicide and another might just shrug it off.”