University cannot restrict speech, peaceful protests over ideological differences: Delhi HC

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has held that universities cannot curb peaceful protests or student expression merely because such views do not align with the administration’s ideology.

Justice Jasmeet Singh made the observation while setting aside disciplinary action taken by Dr B.R. Ambedkar University Delhi against a student accused of participating in a campus protest, Bar and Bench reported.

In an order dated March 13, the court allowed the student’s petition challenging two university orders issued in June and August 2025 that had led to her expulsion, terming the punishment highly disproportionate and legally unsustainable.

The bench indicated that institutions cannot restrict speech or peaceful expression simply because students' views differ from those of the management. It emphasised that dissent and debate are integral to university life, noting that an institution that discourages protest and criticism would fall short of its broader educational role.

The court added that the responsibility of a university is not to suppress dissent but to respond to it constructively, according to The Hindu.

The case stemmed from a dispute involving allegations of ragging and bullying. The student, enrolled in a Global Studies programme, had claimed she faced severe harassment and gender-insensitive remarks, which allegedly led to self-harm. She later became involved in related complaints and protests, following which the university suspended her, The Wire reported.

That suspension had earlier been challenged before the High Court, which in April 2025 permitted her to attend classes but restrained her from participating in protests connected to the matter while the inquiry was underway.

Subsequently, the university accused her of joining a campus boycott organised by a student group and issued a show-cause notice in May 2025, alleging violation of both court directions and campus rules.

The student, however, maintained that she had not participated in any protest and had only been present near the site to meet a friend when she was photographed by security personnel.

Despite her explanation, the university proceeded with disciplinary action and eventually expelled her for allegedly taking part in a sit-in protest, prompting her to approach the court again.

During the hearing, the court underscored that universities are spaces meant for intellectual engagement and critical thinking, where students are expected to develop independent thought and engage in discussion and debate.

The bench also rejected the university’s argument that it could penalise the student for breaching an earlier court order, clarifying that only the court itself has the authority to take action in such matters. It further noted the absence of evidence showing that the alleged protest had disrupted academic activities or affected other students.

Considering that the student had already lost an academic year due to the proceedings, the court directed the university to allow her to resume her studies from the third semester starting in July 2026.