mere fact that an FIR has been registered cannot lead to a conclusion that the student has committed the crime and there cannot be a consequential dismissal on that reason

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 21610 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
JEEVAN RAMESH(UNDER SUSPENSION)
RESPONDENTS:
1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY and orsThe prayer in the writ petition is to quash Ext.P1 order
of suspension and to direct the 2nd respondent to revoke the
suspension and permit the petitioner to undergo the studies.
There is also a prayer for a direction to the 2nd respondent to
consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 taking note of Exts.P4
and P5 judgments after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner
who is a Five Year LL.B student under the 3rd respondent
College was issued with Ext.P1 suspension order during his
last year of studies. The reason for suspending the petitioner
is that he was accused in a crime and an FIR has been
registered against him. The offences alleged are coming
under the NDPS Act. The petitioner has preferred an appeal
against his suspension before the Vice Chancellor and also
approached this Court by filing this writ petition. Based on
2023:KER:74825
WP(C) NO. 21610 OF 2023 3
directions issued by this Court, a hearing was conducted. The
Broad of Adjudication of Students Grievances (BASG) issued
Ext.P6 recommendation finding that keeping the petitioner
who was a 9th semester student under suspension indefinitely
till the criminal case is decided is not legally sustainable and
that the Board was of the opinion that the authorities of the
College should be directed to consider whether the petitioner
can be permitted to rejoin and complete the course. The
recommendation of the BASG was placed before the Vice
Chancellor and the same was approved, as can be seen from
Ext.P6. However, on 06.10.2023 the 3rd respondent has
written to the petitioner stating the involvement of students
in possession and sale of contraband cannot be treated lightly
and leniency towards such Act will affect the morale of other
students studying in the College. It is stated that the Staff
Council and the Management have recommended dismissal.
The petitioner has hence been required to show cause as to
why compulsory transfer certificate should not be issued. It is
submitted that even though Ext.P7 dated 06.10.2023 is
2023:KER:74825
WP(C) NO. 21610 OF 2023 4
worded in such a way to make it appear that it is a show
cause notice, a reading of Ext.P7 will show that a decision
has already been taken by the Staff Council and the
Management to dismiss the petitioner. The petitioner relies
on the decision of this Court in Ashly Varghese and
Another v. State of Kerala and Others in
W.P(C).No.1161 of 2007 and the decision of the Bombay
High Court in Adwait Amrish Goel v. Mukesh Patel
School of Technology & Anr. (Writ Petition No.9889 of
2017). The above judgments have been produced as Exts.P4
and P5 along with the writ petition. The above judgments
would show that the mere fact that an FIR has been
registered cannot lead to a conclusion that the student has
committed the crime and there cannot be a consequential
dismissal on that reason.