Daily Current Affairs : 21-August-2023

Ragging, a practice that has plagued educational institutions in India for decades, has often resulted in tragic consequences. A recent incident in Kolkata, where an 18-year-old undergraduate student lost his life after falling from the second floor of his hostel due to alleged ragging, has once again brought this issue to the forefront. To address this menace, various legal measures and guidelines have been put in place at the national and state levels. In this essay, we will delve into the legal framework surrounding ragging in India, including Supreme Court directives, UGC guidelines, provisions under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and state laws.

Supreme Court’s Stance on Ragging

In 2001, the Supreme Court of India recognized ragging as a serious issue permeating educational institutions across the country. The Court acknowledged the need to take proactive steps to prevent and address this problem. As a result, it issued key guidelines on anti-ragging, setting the stage for a more robust legal response to this issue.

UGC Guidelines: A Comprehensive Approach

In 2009, the University Grants Commission (UGC) stepped in to combat ragging by issuing comprehensive guidelines for universities. These guidelines include nine explanations of what could constitute ragging, offering a clearer understanding of this harmful practice. They also mandate that universities publicly declare their intent to prevent ragging and require students to sign an undertaking committing not to engage in ragging activities.

The UGC guidelines emphasize the establishment of proctoral committees within institutions to actively monitor and regulate interactions between freshers, junior students, and seniors. These committees play a pivotal role in preventing and addressing ragging incidents. Importantly, if a student is found guilty by the anti-ragging committee, the UGC guidelines require committee members to promptly file a First Information Report (FIR) within twenty-four hours.

IPC Provisions: Legal Consequences

While ragging itself is not a specific offense under the Indian Penal Code, it can be penalized under several other provisions. Notably, Section 339 of the IPC criminalizes wrongful restraint, punishing it with simple imprisonment and/or a fine. Wrongful restraint occurs when an individual is prevented from proceeding in a direction they have the right to go.

Section 340 of the IPC deals with wrongful confinement, which is defined as restraining a person in a manner that prevents them from moving beyond certain limits. This offense carries a jail term and/or a fine, demonstrating the legal consequences for those engaged in ragging.

State Laws: A Deterrent

In addition to national guidelines and IPC provisions, some states have enacted their laws to combat ragging. For instance, the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998, empowers institutions to suspend or dismiss students accused of ragging. Moreover, it obligates college administrations to promptly inform the nearest police station in such cases. Failure to do so is deemed an act of abetment, making institutions directly accountable for their inaction.

Important Points:

Supreme Court’s Stance on Ragging:

  • In 2001, the Supreme Court recognized ragging as a serious issue in educational institutions.
  • The Court issued key guidelines on anti-ragging, emphasizing the need for proactive measures.

UGC Guidelines: A Comprehensive Approach:

  • The University Grants Commission (UGC) issued detailed guidelines in 2009.
  • These guidelines include nine explanations of what constitutes ragging.
  • Universities must publicly declare their intent to prevent ragging.
  • Students are required to sign an undertaking not to engage in ragging.
  • Proctoral committees are established to monitor interactions and prevent ragging.
  • Prompt filing of a First Information Report (FIR) is mandated if a student is found guilty.

IPC Provisions: Legal Consequences:

  • Ragging is not a specific offense in the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
  • Wrongful restraint (Section 339) and wrongful confinement (Section 340) in the IPC can be used to penalize ragging.
  • Wrongful restraint pertains to preventing someone from proceeding in a lawful direction.
  • Wrongful confinement involves restraining a person beyond certain limits, leading to legal consequences.

State Laws: A Deterrent:

  • Some states, like Kerala, have their laws to combat ragging.
  • The Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998, allows institutions to suspend or dismiss students involved in ragging.
  • The Act mandates college administrations to inform the nearest police station promptly.
  • Failure to report ragging incidents is considered abetment, holding institutions accountable.
Why In News

Tragically, an 18-year-old undergraduate student lost his life in a devastating incident in Kolkata when he fell from the second floor of his hostel, reportedly as a result of hazing. This heartbreaking event serves as a stark reminder of the urgent need to address the pervasive issue of ragging in educational institutions across the country, emphasizing the critical importance of implementing stricter anti-ragging measures.

MCQs about Ragging in India

  1. What did the Supreme Court of India do in the year 2001 regarding ragging?
    A. Ignored the issue of ragging in educational institutions.
    B. Recognized ragging as a serious problem and issued key guidelines.
    C. Proposed a national day against ragging.
    D. Directed universities to handle ragging internally.
    Correct Answer: B. Recognized ragging as a serious problem and issued key guidelines.
    Explanation: In 2001, the Supreme Court recognized ragging as a serious issue and issued key guidelines on anti-ragging, demonstrating its proactive stance.
  2. Which organization issued comprehensive guidelines for universities on anti-ragging in 2009?
    A. Indian Parliament
    B. University Grants Commission (UGC)
    C. Ministry of Education
    D. Indian Penal Code (IPC)
    Correct Answer: B. University Grants Commission (UGC)
    Explanation: In 2009, the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued comprehensive guidelines for universities on anti-ragging.
  3. Which section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalizes wrongful restraint?
    A. Section 420
    B. Section 339
    C. Section 340
    D. Section 377
    Correct Answer: B. Section 339
    Explanation: Section 339 of the IPC criminalizes wrongful restraint, which can be used to penalize ragging when it involves preventing someone from proceeding in a lawful direction.
  4. What is the consequence if an educational institution fails to report a ragging incident under the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998?
    A. The institution receives a warning.
    B. No action is taken against the institution.
    C. It would be deemed abetment to commit the offense.
    D. The institution is fined heavily.
    Correct Answer: C. It would be deemed abetment to commit the offense.
    Explanation: Under the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998, if an educational institution fails to report a ragging incident, it would be “deemed abetment” to commit the offense, making the institution accountable for not taking action.

Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions

Loading