Here are the 10 latest developments in this story:
Incensed by the college's vague report on action taken following a ragging complaint by 23-year-old Faizan Ahmed from Tinsukia in Assam in February, months before his decomposing body was discovered in a hostel, the court summoned the Director to the next hearing on December 20.
"This court notes that none of the above incidents have been addressed by the director in the report... The report of the Director seems to be thoroughly misleading if not an attempt to cover up," the court said.
In more scathing observations during the hearing, it said, "Have you indicated what action has been taken in the report? Why is the Director giving a lecture here? We asked your client to name the students. The court asked you to name the students involved. What have you done?"
To this question, the lawyer for IIT Kharagpur told the court, "We could not identify the students." A fuming court then said, "What is going on? Your client is playing with the court. Let the Director be present at the next hearing."
"Ask the director to be present at the next hearing. He is lecturing but he cannot name or find students. What kind of director is he?" the court said. "Had IIT taken steps maybe after the February incident, maybe this would not have happened," it added.
On October 14, the decomposing body of Faizan Ahmed, a third-year mechanical engineering student, was found in a hostel room at the IIT Kharagpur. The police claimed he had died by suicide.
His family, however, alleged that he was pushed over the edge by ragging and that his complaints went unheard by IIT-Kharagpur's management. "It was a clear case of murder," they said.
Pulling up the institute's administration and the Director over his death in a hearing three weeks ago, the court observed that the incident indeed appeared to be linked to ragging. It asked for a report on action taken on the complaints and whether the Supreme Court's guidelines on ragging were followed.
Advocate Ranajit Chatterjee, who appeared on behalf of Faizan Ahmed's family, told NDTV, "The order of the court was not complied with. The order had specified that the report should contain the names of the students who are involved in ragging. The report did not contain any name."
"The counsel for the IIT pretended that the Director was not aware of any name even though in the complaint, annexed to the report itself, there was mention of two specific students. The court has referred to the names in the order also. That was a cover-up in the first place," he said.
Post a comment