The Bombay High Court has refused to grant interim relief to a final-year student of Symbiosis Law School, who was suspended over a social media post allegedly contradicting the Indian government’s stance on "Operation Sindoor"—a military operation against Pakistan.

In an order dated May 14, Justice Rohit B Joshi held that the suspension appeared to be administrative rather than punitive, since it was subject to the outcome of pending disciplinary proceedings. “I am, prima facie, of the view that the action of respondent no.2 is not punitive, but administrative in nature in view of the rider in the decision dated May 13, 2025, which assures that a special examination will be conducted for the petitioner if exonerated,” the Court observed.

The student was suspended by the Director of the institution on May 10, pending an inquiry. The suspension barred her from participating in both academic and non-academic activities until further notice. The Campus Disciplinary Committee (CDC) upheld this suspension on May 13.

During the suspension period, she is not allowed to appear for internal assessments, end-semester exams, or backlog papers. However, the CDC clarified that if she is cleared of wrongdoing, special exams would be arranged to ensure she suffers no academic disadvantage.

The case stems from an FIR registered on May 8 at Lakadganj Police Station against one Rajas Madepaddi alias Siddik. The student was reportedly present at a Nagpur hotel with the accused when he was arrested. However, the suspension order does not cite this incident; instead, it refers to a series of posts from the student’s official Instagram handle—most of them political in nature. One post, in particular, was flagged for allegedly contradicting the official narrative on “Operation Sindoor.”

Challenging the suspension, the student’s counsel argued that the action amounted to punishment without due process, pointing to the Symbiosis International (Deemed University) Code of Conduct, 2023, which requires a disciplinary enquiry before any punitive action. He maintained that no such enquiry had been completed at the time the suspension was issued.

The law school’s counsel contended that the suspension was an administrative measure meant to facilitate the enquiry, and assured the Court that the disciplinary process would be completed by May 25.

Noting that the matter was still at a “very primitive stage,” the Court declined to interfere and scheduled the next hearing for May 27. It also emphasized the institution’s assurance that the student’s academic progress would be safeguarded in the event of exoneration, noting, “This in my considered opinion will be sufficient to balance the equities.”

The Court directed the law school to complete the enquiry and communicate its findings to the student by May 25. The student has been instructed to cooperate fully with the proceedings.

Appearances:

• Advocate S. Kulkarni for the petitioner

• Additional Government Pleader S. S. Jachak for the State

• Advocate K. P. Mahalle for Symbiosis Law School