New Delhi, August 2025
In an important clarification for students aspiring to participate in student politics, the Delhi High Court has ruled that candidates contesting the Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) Elections, 2025 are not required to deposit a pre-condition bond of ₹1 lakh.
Justice Mini Pushkarna, disposing of a writ petition filed by two Delhi University students, clarified that the varsity had already confirmed that there is no requirement for depositing the amount at the stage of nomination. Instead, candidates are only required to submit an affidavit or undertaking with respect to the ₹1 lakh bond.
“It is clarified that the petitioners, or any other students intending to contest DUSU elections, are not required to deposit any money at the time of contesting the elections,” the Court stated.
Background of the Case
The controversy arose after Delhi University issued a notification on August 8, 2025, introducing Clause (v), which mandated that every contesting candidate must execute a security bond of ₹1 lakh for any defacement of property or violation of election guidelines by them or their supporters.
Two students, both aspiring to contest the upcoming DUSU elections, challenged this clause before the High Court, calling it unconstitutional and ultra vires the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations, which regulate student body elections across Indian universities.
The petitioners argued:
• They were bona fide students belonging to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category.
• The condition imposed a financial barrier that would exclude students from marginalized backgrounds from contesting elections.
• The notification went against the democratic spirit of equal opportunity in student representation.
Delhi University’s Stand Before Court
During the proceedings, Delhi University’s counsel clarified, on instructions, that there was no requirement of depositing the bond money upfront. The university maintained that only an affidavit or undertaking regarding the bond needed to be filed at the time of nomination.
This clarification essentially addressed the petitioners’ grievance that they would have been excluded from contesting due to their inability to arrange such a large sum.
Justice Mini Pushkarna recorded the varsity’s stand and observed that the clarification removes the alleged financial impediment. With that, the writ petition was disposed of.
The Court also noted that the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations—which form the guiding framework for student elections—emphasize affordability, inclusivity, and preventing unfair financial advantages. By clarifying that no pre-deposit is required, the Court upheld the spirit of those recommendations.
The clarification is expected to have a direct impact on hundreds of aspiring candidates in the upcoming DUSU elections. Student leaders and activists have long argued that steep monetary requirements in elections would disproportionately disadvantage students from EWS and marginalized backgrounds.
By affirming that no pre-deposit is necessary, the High Court’s ruling safeguards the principles of fair access and equal participation in student democracy.
Case Details
• Case Title: Anjali & Anr v. University of Delhi & Anr
• Bench: Justice Mini Pushkarna
• Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Raja Choudhary, Ms. Anushika Mishra, Mr. Kapil Sharma
• Counsel for Respondents: Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr. Subhrodeep Saha, Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Ms. Anamika Thakur, Mr. Abhinav Verma (for UOI); Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal, Ms. Aishwarya Malhotra (for University of Delhi)
