High Court Sets Aside Order Requiring Student to Carry Placard as Punishment, Citing Potential for Lasting Damage to Reputation
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has set aside a contentious order passed by a Single Judge that required a university student, Harsh Awana, to carry a placard as a form of punishment. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansal and Justice Kshitij Shailendra delivered the judgment on February 4, 2026, in response to an appeal filed by Awana against an earlier order that not only revoked his rustication but imposed several conditions, including the controversial placard directive.
The original order, dated October 29, 2025, required Awana to carry a placard with a message of apology and stand at the university gate for 30 minutes daily over a period of 30 days. This directive was part of a series of conditions imposed following the student's involvement in misconduct. The High Court found this particular condition to be unjustified, emphasizing that it was humiliating and could leave a permanent scar on Awana's character.
The court, however, upheld other directions issued by the Single Judge, which included the requirement for Awana to maintain 95% attendance in his classes and to submit a written apology for his actions. These conditions were deemed appropriate in light of Awana's past conduct and poor attendance record.
In the appeal, Awana's counsel argued that the placard directive was not only humiliating but also detrimental to the student's future prospects. The High Court concurred, highlighting that such a punishment was excessive and unwarranted under the circumstances.
The judgment also addressed procedural aspects, such as condoning a 57-day delay in filing the appeal. The court allowed the appeal to proceed, recognizing the importance of addressing the substantive issues raised.
The ruling underscores the judiciary's role in balancing disciplinary measures with the protection of individual dignity and reputation. It reaffirms the principle that punitive actions, particularly those involving public humiliation, must be proportionate and considerate of their long-term impact on individuals.
Bottom Line:
Directions imposed by learned Single Judge under Article 226 of the Constitution, requiring a student to carry a placard as punishment, held unjustified as it leads to humiliation and may cause a permanent scar on the character of the student.
Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Article 226
Harsh Awana v. Chairman U.G.C. Bahadurshah Zafar Road, (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2850054
