'Enough is Enough': Delhi HC Over Violence Amid DUSU, Warns of Staying Results
Delhi High Court warns of staying DUSU poll results over violence, demands strict action.
advertisement
The Delhi High Court has issued a warning that it may stay the counting of votes and declaration of results for the Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) elections if authorities fail to take satisfactory action against incidents of violence and misconduct reported during the campaign period. The court’s caution follows multiple reports of clashes, vandalism, and alleged assaults on teachers and students across several university campuses. Voting is scheduled for 18 September 2026, with counting set for the following day.
According to Live Law, the High Court has barred all victory processions by student organisations, candidates, or any other individuals after the results are declared. The bench, led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, also summoned student bodies and their candidates to explain why exemplary electoral damages should not be imposed for violations of Lyngdoh Committee recommendations and previous judicial orders.
As Scroll highlighted, the court expressed strong dissatisfaction with the responses from Delhi University, Delhi Police, and the Union government regarding the violence. The bench remarked, “Enough is enough,” and directed all three authorities to submit status reports detailing the actions taken against those responsible for the disturbances. The court noted repeated violations of both Lyngdoh Committee guidelines and judicial orders.
On the final day of campaigning, several incidents were reported, including an alleged assault on a teacher at Motilal Nehru College (Evening) and clashes outside Law Centre-I over campaign banners as coverage revealed. Teachers have written to the Vice-Chancellor seeking urgent intervention, citing threats, intimidation, and physical altercations involving both teachers and students across the university.
The High Court made it clear that criminal conduct cannot be justified in the name of democracy, stating that the material before it indicated a “complete failure” by authorities and students to ensure peaceful elections as analysis showed. The court warned, “No excuses will be accepted by the court. We are making it very clear that though we are not staying the election or postponing the election, if we are not satisfied by your action, tomorrow we can pass harsher orders, including staying the counting and declaration of results.”
“You are thrashing your own teachers in the name of being creative. Brandishing guns. Or you [Delhi University] simply say you cannot control anything,” the court remarked, according to the records.
During the hearing, the court was informed that Delhi Police had issued 998 challans, impounded 30 cars, rusticated one student, registered six FIRs, and arrested four students in connection with the election-related incidents as reporting indicated. The court directed that criminal action initiated by the police must be taken to its logical conclusion and emphasised that any violation of its orders would amount to contempt of court.
Teachers’ associations described the situation as a matter of serious concern, noting that similar instances of threats and physical altercations had been reported in other colleges at the end of their statement. The court reiterated that it would not hesitate to impose collective electoral damages on both individual students and student organisations found violating the norms.
“We cannot permit this,” the bench stated. “The situation needs to be checked by all means.”
The Lyngdoh Committee recommendations, which the court referenced, were established by the Supreme Court in 2005 to curb violence and political influence in student elections. The court’s orders underscore the expectation that these guidelines be strictly followed to maintain order and integrity in the electoral process as further details emerged.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.