The Allahabad High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a judicial inquiry and punitive action against police personnel for alleged brutality on law students at Shree Ramswaroop Memorial University, Lucknow. The bench clarified that remedies for the aggrieved students exist under law, and ongoing proceedings and approvals relating to the university remain unaffected. The Court further observed that the order does not condone any alleged illegal acts but emphasized that repetition of PILs on the same matter would not be entertained.
The petition was filed by a practicing advocate alleging police brutality against law students at Shree Ramswaroop Memorial University, including incidents where male police allegedly assaulted female students. The petition sought multiple directions: constitution of a judicial inquiry or commission, criminal and departmental action against police personnel, restraining the university and other law colleges from running courses without Bar Council of India (BCI) approval, and ensuring medical and psychological rehabilitation for injured students.
The petitioner, appearing in person, urged the Court to initiate a judicial probe and direct punitive measures against the police while also addressing alleged violations by the university. The State’s Standing Counsel and counsel for the Bar Council of India submitted that the reliefs sought either fall under pending or alternative legal remedies or are already the subject of another PIL concerning the university’s recognition and approvals.
The Court noted that the students who were allegedly beaten had not approached the Court themselves. It emphasized that for reliefs related to police action, the aggrieved individuals could seek remedies under existing legal provisions. Regarding the university, the Court referred to the Bar Council of India’s prior order granting provisional approval for the academic session, subject to compliance with relevant regulations. On medical relief, the Court observed that the students were admitted to King George’s Medical University (KGMU), which had not been made a party, limiting the Court’s ability to pass directions.
The Court explicitly stated, "This order should not be understood as condoning any illegal act of any of the opposite parties or the private University nor will it affect any other proceeding which may be pending or may be initiated herein-after in respect to the aforesaid subject matter, as per law."
In view of the above, the High Court declined to entertain the PIL and disposed of the writ petition. The Court underscored that pending proceedings, FIRs, and ongoing legal remedies are unaffected and reiterated that repetition of similar PILs on the same subject would not be entertained.
Case Title: Ashish Kumar Singhj Vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko and Others
Case No.: Public Interest Litigation (Pil) No. - 949 of 2025
Coram: Justice Rajan Roy, Justice Manjive Shukla
Advocate for Petitioner: In Person
Advocate for Respondent: C.S.C., Shailesh Kumar Pathak
Picture Source :
