'Humiliating': Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Single Judge's Order Asking Student To Display 'Won't Misbehave With Girls' Placard

Terming the direction as unjustified and humiliating, a bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra added that such a punishment would leave a "permanent scar" on the student's character.

Briefly put, the bench was hearing a Special Appeal directed against the order of a Single Judge passed in October in a writ petition filed by the student.

Taking a humanitarian view, given that the appellant's father is a poor farmer, the Single Judge, having set aside the student's rustication, imposed certain conditions on him (including the condition under challenge).

Other conditions included filing a notarised affidavit pledging 95% attendance and not leaving the premises during class hours, and filing a written apology within 72 hours. Interestingly, the bench had also directed the police authorities to deploy an 'anti-romeo mobile squad' at the university gates.

Challenging the direction no. (II) (placard condition) of the order impugned, he moved the HC, where his counsel argued that the same was not only humiliating for the student, but it would perpetually affect his career, and therefore, it was prayed that the same be set aside.

On the other hand, the Counsel for the University supported the impugned order. arguing that the petition itself was not maintainable and that the Single Judge had already taken a lenient view by allowing the student to continue his studies despite the disciplinary issues.

The division bench noted that while other directions were justified, looking to the conduct of the appellant in having 50% attendance in the earlier academic years, the nature of direction no. (II) was not justified under any circumstances.

The Court consequently set aside the said direction

To ensure that the student is not prejudiced by the litigation process, the Bench clarified that if the student had been re-rusticated solely because he failed to follow the placard direction, he must be given one opportunity to comply with the requirement of a written apology (Direction III).

Upon doing so, his rustication shall stand set aside, provided he sincerely follows the attendance requirements, the bench added.

Counsel for Appellant: Gopal Srivastava

Counsel for Respondent: Anubhav Singh, Jagdish Pathak, Pratik Chandra

Case Title: XXX v. Chairman U.G.C. And Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 62