Delhi High Court
Ranjit Kaur vs State N.C.T. Of Delhi on 1 April, 2026
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Reserved on: 12th January, 2026
Pronounced on:01st April, 2026
+ W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 & CRL.M.A. 13581/2021
RANJIT KAUR
W/o Sh. S.S. Chawla,
R/o A-8/40, 2nd Floor, Rana Pratap Singh,
New Delhi. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, Ms. Urvashi
Sharma and Mr. Vinayak Gautam
Advocates.
versus
1. STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI
2. DR. NEELAM
Professor, Hindi Department
Laxmi Bai College, DU, Delhi ....Respondents
Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for
State with ACP Garima Tiwari, Insp.
Yashwant and SI Sonal Raj, P.S.:
Bharat Nagar.
Ms. Pooja Roy, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as
“Cr.P.C.”) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner, Ranjit Kaur seeking
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 1 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
quashing of FIR No. 0512/2021 under Sections 323/504 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC“) and Section 3 of The
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter referred to as “SC/ST Act”), P.S. Bharat Nagar, Delhi and
all the proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. The Petitioner states that she is an Associate Professor in-Charge of
the Hindi Department, Lakshmibai College, Delhi, and is a law-abiding
citizen having clean antecedents. The Complainant also happens to be the
Associate Professor, in the same College. A Departmental Meeting of the
Teachers was held on 16.08.2021, in relation to preparations regarding the
National Assessment and Accreditation Council (“NAAC”). The Minutes of
the Meeting were prepared, which were required to be signed by the
respective members who had participated in the meeting.
3. The Minutes were thus, circulated to each member for their
respective signatures, but when it came to the Respondent
No.2/Complainant, Dr. Neelam to sign, she stated that she would read them
at her ease, which may take one to two hours, and she would sign only
thereafter.
4. The Petitioner requested the Complainant to read and sign the same,
as the Minutes of the Meeting hardly comprised of four lines, and the
website updates in relation to NAAC was required to be done, and the same
could not be unnecessarily delayed. The Petitioner asked the Complainant to
give back the Register, as she started to take it along with her. The Petitioner
tried to take the register back, on which the Complainant pulled her hair, and
in the process, a page of the Register was torn by the Complainant. The
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 2 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
Petitioner made a Complaint to the Principal, a copy of which was annexed
with the plaint.
5. It was further stated that the Complainant also made a hand-written
Complaint to the Principal on the day of the alleged incident, i.e.,
16.08.2021, which was the first version placed before the Principal and was
written by the Complainant. In this Complaint, there was not a whisper
about any casteist remark being made or her being humiliated as a member
of the Scheduled Caste (“SC”), or of any ill-treatment because she belonged
to the SC community.
6. The Complainant also preferred a Complaint on the same day, i.e.,
16.08.2021 in the P.S. Bharat Nagar, Delhi. This Complaint was also in the
handwriting of the Complainant and had no allegation whatsoever of any
sort of humiliation by the Petitioner, or any incident in regard to her being a
member of SC/ST community. As per her own Complaint, there was no
allegation of her being subjected to any atrocity.
7. The Complainant thereafter, preferred a second Complaint before
the Principal on 17.08.2021, which was a complete improvement of the
earlier story, given by her in writing via Complaint to the Principal on the
previous day. The casteist remarks were deliberately mentioned in an
afterthought fashion in the second Complaint, which shows that the
Complaint was manifestly attended with mala fides and had been instituted
with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance and because of private and
personal grudges against the Petitioner.
8. The Petitioner claimed that she had good harmony with the
Complainant and other fellow staff members and always respected the
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 3 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
Complainant, and there was no complaint at any time. The relevant
WhatsApp chat communication with the Complainant, proves to the
contrary as to what has been belatedly stated in the subsequent Complaint,
which has been surreptitiously converted into the FIR.
9. The Petitioner further submitted that the FIR was subsequently
registered on a belated Complaint dated 23.08.2021. The earlier Complaint
dated 16.08.2021 filed in the Police Station, has been done away. The FIR
has been registered on this subsequent Complaint instead of the original
Complaint dated 16.08.2021. The material improvements and the concoction
of the facts in the well-drafted complaint, is nothing but an afterthought, and
the allegations made against this Petitioner are false.
10. The quashing of the FIR is sought on the grounds that it is an
abuse of process of law and has been registered on the complaint with an
intent to arrest the Petitioner and is liable to be quashed. The Complaint is
an outcome of malice and is intended to spite her due to private and personal
grudges.
11. Furthermore, the Complaint is vague and absurd, as it does not even
mention under which clause or sub-clause of Section 3 of SC/ST Act, has it
been registered. Even if the allegations made in the Complaint are taken at
their face value and accepted in their entirety, it does not constitute a prima
facie offence against the accused. The contents of the Complaint are
inherently improbable, on the basis of which no prudent person can ever
reach a just conclusion that there is any ground to proceed against the
Petitioner.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 4 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
12. In order to constitute an offence under Section 3 of SC/ST Act,
there has to be intentional insult or intimidation coupled with intention to
humiliate only because the person concerned belongs to SC/ST community.
However, in the instant case, none of these ingredients are made out. The
Complainant and the Petitioner have been working in the same department
for over 08 years, and there has been no complaints ever in the past.
13. Reliance is placed on Parbat Bhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017)
9 SCC 641.
14. A prayer is, therefore, made that the FIR may be quashed.
15. The Respondent No.2/Complainant, Dr. Neelam has filed her
Reply to the Petition, wherein it is not denied that NAAC meeting had taken
place in the College premises on 16.08.2021 at around 11:00 AM, which
was attended by total 16 people. The Minutes of the Meeting were prepared
at the end of the meeting, and the Petitioner, who was the teacher in-charge,
told everyone to sign the minutes. The register was passed on to every
Professor. When it reached the Complainant, she wanted to read the contents
of the Minutes of the Meeting, which offended the Petitioner and she started
pressurizing her to sign it without reading. At around 12:20 PM, when she
refused to sign without reading, the Petitioner caught hold of her and
snatched the register from her. She also slapped her on the right cheek in
front of all the colleagues for not signing the Minutes of the Meeting without
reading them.
16. The Respondent No. 2 asserts that she had recently got surgery done
on her face, and when the Petitioner slapped her, she was not only physically
abused but was also mentally and publicly humiliated.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 5 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
17. She further stated that at 03:00 PM, she went to the Principal to
inform her about the entire incident and requested to register the Complaint.
However, instead of accepting the Complaint, she was asked by the
Principal to settle the matter.
18. At about 04:09 PM, an email was sent by the Complainant to
Lakshmibai College, wherein she mentioned that the Diary number on the
Complaint was denied to her, and therefore, she had sent her Complaint
through email. Subsequently, Diary No. 6856 was given on her Complaint
only on the next day, i.e., 17.08.2021. She was pressurized to keep the entire
incident under the wraps.
19. The Complainant further stated that left with no option, she was
compelled to give a written Complaint to SHO, P.S. Bharat Nagar at around
06:00 PM. At around 09:30 PM, she received a call from the Police Station
to get her medical done, but because it was late at night and she is a resident
of Ghaziabad, she requested to get her medical done on the next day.
20. The Complainant asserted that when, on the next day, she insisted
for a medical examination, it was not paid heed to and was given an NCR
dated 16.08.2021, under Section 323 IPC, although the Petitioner had
committed the offence under SC/ST Act.
21. The Complainant asserted that the conduct of the Petitioner has been
biased towards her, right from the commencement of her appointment as she
belonged to a Scheduled Caste and was looked down upon by the Petitioner.
22. On 18.08.2021 at 11:50 AM, Principal of Lakshmibai College sent a
Show Cause Notice to the Complainant as well as the Petitioner. The ACP
came and waited for the Principal in her room and she had gone somewhere
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 6 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
at 01:00 PM, but she did not return. In the meanwhile, the Principal’s office
teachers of Hindi department were called and ACP made an inquiry from
them. They were the Professors, namely, Dr. Suman, Dr. Manish Chandra
Shukla, Dr. Manisha Shankhwar, Dr. Manesh Meena, Dr. Poonam Rani, Dr.
Anshu Singh Jharwar who confirmed about the incident having taken place
and Respondent No. 2 being slapped and humiliated in public by the
Petitioner. The ACP told the teachers to give their statements and give the
complaint again.
23. The Respondent No. 2 received an email on 18.08.2021 at 11:48
AM, from the Principal along with the attachment wherein she made
allegations against Respondent No. 2 and asked her to give a reply within 24
hours. At around 08:06 PM, the Complainant received an email from the
Principal wherein the Petitioner’s email was attached and she had submitted
that she was preparing a reply to the Complaint of the Respondent No. 2.
24. On 19.08.2021, Complainant was compelled to give complaint to
the ACP, P.S. Ashok Vihar, SHO, P.S. Bharat Nagar dated 19.08.2021
making a request for registration of FIR under SC/ST Act, against the
Petitioner.
25. The Respondent No. 2 replied to the email dated 18.08.2021 of the
Principal, wherein Petitioner had made allegations against the Complainant.
The Petitioner in her email had given an explanation to the Complaint filed
by the Respondent No. 2.
26. On 20.08.2021, Dr. Poonam Rani, Dr. Suman, Dr. Anshu Singh
Jharwar, Dr. Manisha Shankhwar, Dr. Santoshi Kumari, Dr. Manish
Chandra Shukla, Dr. Manesh Meena along with Respondent No. 2, were
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 7 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
called for their statements at P.S. Bharat Nagar in which the Petitioner was
also included.
27. A call was received at about 08:00 PM from the Police Station by
the Complainant asking for the contact numbers of the witnesses who had
not gone to the Police Station that day, i.e. on 20.08.2021 and were witness
to be incident.
28. On 21.08.2021, statement of remaining witnesses, namely, Dr.
Nirmal Rani, Dr. Amita Misra, Dr. Ravindra Kumar, Dr. Promila, Dr.
Meenu Khaneja and Dr. Rashim Gupta were recorded, except that of Sh.
Rajbir Singh, Dean of the college. On 23.08.2021, the Complainant gave a
letter along with covering letter to National Commission for Scheduled
Caste, requesting them to hold an inquiry and to provide help her to get
justice.
29. The Respondent No. 2 received the copy of the FIR No. 0512/2021
dated 23.08.2021 under Sections 323/504 IPC. Notice under Section 91 and
160 Cr.P.C. was sent to the Complainant whereby she was asked to submit
her Caste Certificate and to meet the ACP. Accordingly, the Caste
Certificate was submitted to the ACP on 26.08.2021 at around 04:14 PM.
30. Soft copy of the Writ Petition was sent to the Complainant and the
matter was listed for hearing on the next day and no time was given to the
Complainant to engage a lawyer or seek legal advice.
31. In the hearing on the Petition listed before this court, no information
was given about the witnesses of the incident and this Court on 27.08.2021
granted interim protection to the Petitioner that no coercive action be taken
against her, subject to her joining of the investigation.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 8 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
32. On 02.09.2021 pursuant to Notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C., she
gave her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. to the Police. She was asked
to make a list of witnesses, which was provided to the Police.
33. On 01.09.2021, Respondent No. 2 wrote a letter to ACP to get her
statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded, which was recorded on
07.09.2021.
34. The Fact-Finding Committee was established by the College about
which she was given an intimation through the WhatsApp. She was
informed about the Members of Fact-Finding Committee, on 13.09.2021.
35. Furthermore, the Complainant received a letter from NCT of Delhi,
regarding SC/ST Act. A statement was recorded by the Fact-Finding
Committee set up by Lakshmibai College. The statement of five professors
was also recorded on 20.09.2021. On 23.09.2021, the statements of 06 other
teachers were recorded. On 27.09.2021, 07 professors gave their statement
at the Police Station. These 07 professors were also called by Fact Finding
Committee for their statement, on 01.10.2021. These 07 professors
accordingly gave their statements.
36. On 08.10.2021, Complainant gave a complaint to SC/ST Act and
met the Chairman on 11.10.2021.
37. On merits, all the contentions made in the Petition, are denied. It is
submitted that there was no ground for quashing of the FIR and claimed
that the Petition may be dismissed.
38. The Written Submissions have been filed by the Petitioner as well
as the Complainant, in support of their respective Petition and reply.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 9 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
39. The Chargesheet has been filed in the Court, copy of which was
placed on record, by the Petitioner.
Submissions heard and the record perused.
40. Admittedly, the Petitioner, Ranjit Kaur and the Respondent
No.2/Complainant, Dr. Neelam have been working as Associate Professors
in Lakshmibai College, for about 08 years. An unfortunate incident
happened on 16.08.2021, when after attending the NAAC Meeting, the
Minutes of Meeting were prepared and the Register was circulated to all the
Professors, for signatures. When the register reached the Complainant, she
sought some time to first read the Minutes, before signing. The Petitioner
wanted her to sign the Minutes as they had to be uploaded on the NAAC
website at the earliest. On this, an altercation took place and apparently, the
Petitioner slapped the Complainant, in the presence of other teachers. This
was the initiation point of the dispute, inter se the parties.
41. The Complainant gave a handwritten Complaint dated 16.08.2021
to the SHO, P.S. Bharat Nagar wherein she again narrated the same
incident of 16.08.2021 and a stated that she had been slapped by the
Petitioner.
42. A handwritten Complaint was given on the same day, i.e.
16.08.2021 by the Complainant addressed to the Principal of the
Lakshmibai College wherein she stated about the Meeting and the insistence
of the Petitioner to sign the Minutes without reading, on which an argument
took place as the Petitioner was getting irritated as to why the Complainant
wanted to read the Minutes, before signing. She allegedly slapped her and
snatched the Register and told her to quietly sign the register. She was
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 10 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
subjected to mental and physical torture and that she has been suffering from
health issues, despite which she has been working with diligence in the
College. She gave the name of the Professors who were present, in her
Complaint.
43. This Complaint was followed by another typed detailed Complaint
dated 16.08.2021 to the Principal which contained the similar allegations of
the register being snatched from her by the Petitioner and she being slapped
in the presence of the other teachers and also that a page of the register got
torn. She further stated that for last 28 years, she has been working in the
College and no colleague ever had any complaint from her. For defaming
her and ruining her image, she is being targeted for work in relation to
NAAC. She is scared and upset on false allegations being made against
her and by the humiliation to which she has been subjected, because of
pulling of her hair. She accordingly, stated that the she may be given
protection and the academic environment may be saved from getting ruined.
44. On the next day, i.e. 17.08.2021, she again gave a Complaint to the
Principal of the Lakshmibai College wherein while narrating the entire
incident of being slapped by the Petitioner, she further alleged that the
Petitioner had treated her in such manner as she belong to a reserved caste
and that she always had a grudge against her. On this account, she on many
occasions had made casteist remarks that “ye quote wale arakshan labharthi
log na jaane kahan-kahan se aa jaate hain, anpadh gawar bari bari karke
chale aate hain”.
45. The Complainant further claimed that in the near past she got
promoted as Associate Professor, but this fact was not acceptable to the
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 11 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
Petitioner. For the last many years, there is a casteist attitude evident from
her conduct. She thus, raised a question of she being subjected to mental
torture on account of her caste. She specifically claimed that Dr. Ranjit Kaur
had adopted insulting and humiliating attitude towards the colleagues
belonging to a Scheduled Caste which is not appropriate for the reputation
of the educational institution. She suffered insult to her self-respect and
therefore made a request that a strict action be taken against Dr. Ranjit Kaur.
46. Significantly, this specific remark was absent from both initial
handwritten Complaints, the one addressed to the Principal on 16.08.2021
and the one addressed to the SHO, P.S. Bharat Nagar on 16.08.2021. The
caste element appears for the first time only in the Complaint dated
17.08.2021 to the Principal, as a belated addition to an already narrated
version of events.
47. The Petitioner in support of her Petition and to show the cordiality
with the Complainant, has annexed various email WhatsApp a chat
communication wherein they had been talking to each other in a cordial
manner.
48. In all her Complaints, whether addressed to the Principal of
Lakshmibai College or to the Police, the only allegation made was that an
altercation over signing of the Minutes of Meeting and the Petitioner having
slapped the Complainant. So much so, on the Complaint of the Complainant
dated 16.08.2021 addressed to the SHO, NCR No. 0047/2021 dated
16.08.2021 was recorded under Section 323 IPC, in respect of this incident.
49. It is only subsequently that the Complainant made a Complaint on
19.08.2021 to the ACP wherein she asserted that the Petitioner had used
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 12 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
filthy language against her, in presence of the staff members who are from
non-SC/ST community and were the witness to the incident. Such illegal act
done by the teacher of a prestigious college not only infringe the rights
under the Constitution of India of the individuals to live a dignified life, but
also was contrary. The matter was reported to the Police but no FIR under
SC/ST Act has been registered on her complaint. She kept insisting for her
medical examination, but no heed was paid to her request. She claimed that
the college authority in connivance with the accused person, were trying to
save her. A similar Complaint was made on 19.08.2021 to the SHO and the
ACP.
50. In these Complaints as well, there are no specific details of the
casteist remark that had been allegedly made against her. Her averment was
only that being a member of an SC community, the attitude of the Petitioner
was oppressive and there were undertones of her dislike for the members of
SC community. Again, it was a general feeling of dislike and humiliation
which the Complainant perceived from the attitude of the Petitioner, but
there is a no specific averment in regard to any casteist remark having been
made against her.
51. She had again made a Complaint dated 23.08.2021, on the basis of
which the FIR was registered. However, in this Complaint as well, no
specific casteist remark or expression has been attributed to the Petitioner.
The caste element finds no mention whatsoever in any of the Complaints
made on 16.08.2021, whether to the Principal or to the Police and was
introduced only as an afterthought in the Complaint dated 17.08.2021
onwards, without any specificity even thereafter.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 13 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
52. The FIR does not specify under which clause or sub-section of
Section 3 of the SC/ST Act it has been registered. The relevant statement is
reproduced as under:
“Dr. Ranjeet Kaur was having grudge against me and caste bias
against me for the reason best known to her, she grabbed this
opportunity and attacked me, humiliated me. She caught hold of me,
snatched the register and slapped me. She used filthy language for
me in the presence of other staff members who are from non SC-ST
community have witnessed the incident. I was wondering how such
an illegal act may be done by a teacher of prestigious College.”
53. Herein, it is pertinent to refer to Section 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of
the SC/ST Act, as originally enacted, which is reproduced as under:
“3. Punishments for offences atrocities. —
(1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe,-
(x) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a
member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place
within public view;
(xi) assaults or uses force to any woman belonging to a Scheduled
Caste or a Scheduled Tribe with intent to dishonour or outrage her
modesty;”
54. Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act (as amended) reads as
under:-
“3. Punishments for offences atrocities.–
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 14 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
(1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe,–
(r) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a
member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place
within public view;
(s) abuses any member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe by
caste name in any place within public view;”
55. In the case of Shajan Skaria vs. The State of Kerala, 2024 SCC
OnLine SC 2249, the basic ingredients to constitute the offence under
Section 3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 were noted as under:
a. Accused person must not be a member of the
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe;
b. Accused must intentionally insult or intimidate a
member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe;
c. Accused must do so with the intent to humiliate
such a person; and
d. Accused must do so at any place within public
view.
56. For an offence to be made out under Section 3 of SC/ST Act, it is
essential that the alleged act must have been committed with the intent to
humiliate the victim, specifically on account of her caste identity. It is not
sufficient that the Complainant belongs to a Scheduled Caste and that she
was subjected to ill-treatment or a physical altercation. The nexus between
the alleged act and the caste identity of the victim, must be clearly and
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 15 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
unequivocally established from the very face of the Complaint. The genesis
of the present dispute, as is evident even from the Complainant’s own initial
Complaints, was an administrative disagreement over signing of the minutes
of the meeting.
57. Pertinently, it is the statement of Dr. Poonam Rani recorded under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 20.09.2021 that is the sole source of any specific
casteist remarks allegedly made by the Petitioner. She alone attributes the
words “You bhangi, chamar, what will you do to me? You quota people
have spoiled the entire atmosphere of the college” to the Petitioner. No
other witness examined attributes any such specific casteist remark to the
Petitioner. Dr. Poonam Rani stands alone in this regard, uncorroborated by
any other eyewitness to the incident.
58. Furthermore, the Complainant’s statement under Section 164
Cr.P.C. was recorded before the learned MM on 07.09.2021. The statement
is reproduced as under:
“…
Despite this, I clearly stated that I would not sign the minutes without
reading after listening to this they become angry and in front of
everyone and creating a pressure on me and told me to sign the
minutes without reading it. But I denied this. I told them that I will not
sign without reading it. Because before that there was an argument in
the meeting that has been held and minutes were prepared and while
signing in those minutes, I told them to write 17 sanctions in those
minutes. Dr Ranjit Kaur told me that she will write. After doing this I
signed in the minutes but she did not write the 17-sanction post and
minutes were read in the meeting due to this I will not sign without
reading this. I Just want to say and, in that course, they become so
angry that they slapped me and snatch away the register and said
she came to read the minutes. These people come from a backward
area and started comparing that their students are more intelligent.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 16 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
Also, she mentioned derogatory words related to the caste and also
coming from the quota background they had created a bad
atmosphere in the college. Also, these types of words were spoken by
the socially backward people this behaviour had already been done
before. After this, pressure was put on me repeatedly and
unnecessary objections were raised against me by the college
administration.
Despite performing my duties honestly, I was subjected to
discrimination. I was deliberately not given proper work-related
information, and obstacles were created in the discharge of my
academic responsibilities. I was also not allowed to participate
properly in academic and administrative work of the college. On 16
August 2021, I was again called and was verbally informed that
disciplinary action would be taken against me. I was told that my
resistance and objections were creating problems. Thereafter, I was
transferred from my position and was forcefully relieved from my
responsibilities. This action was taken arbitrarily and without
following due process. Because of this, I suffered severe mental
stress and anxiety. I had to undergo medical treatment for a long
period. Even today, I am facing physical and mental difficulties as a
result of these actions. All these actions were taken deliberately and
with malafide intention.
I was in shock and so distraught that I couldn’t even bring myself to
use abusive or offensive language in my complaint letter. I am a
teacher. I couldn’t use such language because it’s not appropriate
and is unforgivable. In a single blow, Dr. Ranjit Kaur has completely
destroyed my reputation. What must my students and fellow teachers
be thinking about me? How could a teacher be subjected to such
violence? I still haven’t been able to get over all of this. I still feel
humiliated. I feel ashamed going to college. Yet, I somehow manage to
pull myself together and focus on my work at the college. He had used
abusive language. People from other departments were also present
at the time. I felt so humiliated. I didn’t know what to do in front of
everyone. I felt so ashamed. After a few hours, I composed myself
and wrote a complaint letter to the college. The college
administration received my complaint letter about this incident. The
police refused to register my complaint in the diary. It was only when
members of the SC-ST union arrived on August 17, 2021, that my
complaint letter was finally recorded in the diary. However, when the
college refused to register my complaint on August 16, 2021, I
emailed the complaint letter to the college. I felt so humiliated by thisW.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 17 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
incident. I am providing this information regarding the abusive
behavior of Dr. Ranjit Kaur. Such actions constitute a serious offense
for any teacher. I request that I be given justice for the damage done
to my social reputation, so that no other teacher or student has to
endure this. should not carry out such a heinous and violent act like
the one Dr. Ranjit Kaur committed. I am waiting for justice. At the
time this incident occurred, Dr. Ranjit Kaur said, “What kind of
testimony will these ad-hoc teachers give?” Since Dr. Ranjit Kaur is
the teacher in charge, she can misuse her position and put pressure on
them. I understood that the testimonies were given to the police by Dr.
Santoshi from the History Department, Dr. Manish Meena from the
Hindi Department, and Dr. Poonam Rani from the Hindi Department
S.T. All the teachers witnessed Dr. Ranjit Kaur using abusive
language.”
59. Even in this statement as reproduced above, the alleged casteist
remarks are referred to only in vague and general terms. The Complainant
stated that the Petitioner said “these people come from a backward area”
and made references to persons coming from “quota background” creating
a “bad atmosphere”, and that “these types of words were spoken by socially
backward people”.
60. Pertinently, the Complainant herself acknowledged in her Section
164 statement, the reason for the absence of specific casteist language in her
initial Complaints, stating: “I was in shock and so distraught that I couldn’t
even bring myself to use abusive or offensive language in my complaint
letter. I am a teacher. I couldn’t use such language because it’s not
appropriate.” Again, this explanation, does not suffice especially when a
detailed typed Complaint was prepared and submitted on the very same day,
i.e., 16.08.2021, to both the Principal as well as the Police, which contained
no whisper of any caste-based remark.
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 18 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
61. The statement of a single witness attributing specific casteist
remarks, which the Complainant herself never once specifically
corroborated, cannot form the basis of a charge under the SC/ST Act.
62. As regards the offences under Sections 323 and 504 IPC, both are
non-cognizable offences. The FIR could not have been registered for these
offences without an order of the learned Magistrate as mandated under
Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. The FIR, therefore, cannot sustain itself on the basis
of these offences either. Furthermore, NCR No. 0047/2021 under Section
323 IPC, has already been registered on the same day of the incident in
question i.e. 16.08.2021. The Complainant is at liberty to avail the
appropriate remedy in accordance with law, in respect of these allegations.
Conclusion:
63. In light of the observations made above, the Petition is allowed.
64. The FIR No. 0512/2021 under Sections 323/504 IPC and Section
3 of the SC/ST Act, P.S. Bharat Nagar, Delhi and all proceedings
emanating therefrom, are hereby, quashed.
65. The Petition is disposed of along with pending Application(s), if
any.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE
APRIL 01, 2026
N
W.P.(CRL) 1622/2021 Page 19 of 19
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:01.04.2026
16:49:09
