DUSU president’s future hangs in balance after HC gets application highlighting FIR against him

Students on the day of DU students elerction (PTI) 

The political future of newly elected Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) president Rocky Tuseed was thrown into jeopardy Wednesday, with the Delhi High Court issuing a notice to him after an intervening application claimed he had concealed facts, including his arrest on criminal charges. The application was filed by Suman Chauhan and Jivesh Tiwari, counsel for Rajat Choudhary, a first-year student of DU who contested the polls for the post of president from the ABVP but lost to Tuseed.

The application underlined the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations, which state that a candidate should not have been tried/convicted of any criminal offence or subjected to any disciplinary action by the university. According to the application, Rocky did not disclose that an FIR was registered against him in Rajouri Garden on August 6, 2014, under IPC sections 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt ), 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint) and 34.

It claimed that he was sent to judicial custody from August 28, 2014 to September 15, 2014. As the police had filed chargesheet, and Rocky was under trial for grave offences, his candidature should be dismissed, it said. The application alleged that he had concealed this information in his DUSU poll affidavit.

Counsel for Tuseed, Vivek Tankha, said the intervention application was not maintainable because in the case of the intervenor having a grievance after completion of polls, he could complain to DU’s grievance committee. There was no need for disclosure of the FIR as Tuseed was not convicted for the offence, Tankha said, adding that earlier, too, there have been candidates who fought elections despite having an FIR against them.

Choudhary’s application also underscored that the Lyngdoh committee had specified that “the candidate should in no event have any academic arrears in the year of contesting election”. However, the application alleged that Tuseed had faced ‘essential repeat’ in two semesters of MA in Buddhist Studies in the academic session 2016-2017.

The plea said that to overcome the committee’s clause, Rocky withdrew his admission on August 16, 2017, stating personal reasons. The same day, the waiting list for admission to the same course for the academic year 2017-2018 reflected a name, Rocky Tushir, it alleged.

Under the differently spelt name, Rocky took fresh admission, it alleged. “Petitioner (Tuseed) got admission with his previous name and document. The spelling in the entrance exam was changed so that at the time of entrance card issuance, the system does not detect his name as the candidate already studying in the course,” said the application.

It alleged that Rocky had sworn false affidavit since, according to DU’s code of conduct, a candidate has to provide an undertaking that he did not fail in the preceding academic year, or got re-admitted in the current year. Justice Indermeet Kaur has sought a reply from Tuseed on November 15.