Students Contesting DUSU Polls Need Not Deposit Rs. 1 Lakh Bond: Delhi High Court Clarifies
The Delhi High Court has clarified that the students contesting the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) Elections, 2025, need not deposit the bond of Rs. 1 lakh, which was imposed as a precondition by the varsity.“…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 Delhi High Court has clarified that the students contesting the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) Elections, 2025, need not deposit the bond of Rs. 1 lakh, which was imposed as a precondition by the varsity.
“…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,” Justice Mini Pushkarna said.
This was after Delhi University's counsel made a statement on instructions that except for filing an affidavit or undertaking with regard to the bond of Rs. 1 lakh, there was no requirement of pre-deposit of the said amount as per a Notification issued by the varsity.
In view of the said clarification, the Court disposed of a plea filed by two students challenging the validity of Clause 'v' of a Notification issued by DU on August 08 mandating a Rs. 1 lakh security bond as a pre-condition for contesting the DUSU polls. The petitioners were aspiring to contest the said elections.
As per the impugned notification, each contesting candidate was mandated to execute a bond of Rs. 1 Lakh for the offence of any defacement or violation of the Guidelines, by themselves or their supporters, at the time of filing of nomination for any post of DUSU.
It was their case that the impugned pre condition was unconstitutional and ultra vires the Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations. It was contended that the petitioners were bona fide students of Delhi University and belonged to EWS category.
It was submitted that Clause 'v' of the impugned Notification imposed an unprecedented financial barrier by requiring Rs. 1 Lakh security bond and that the petitioners were not in a position to fulfill the said condition.
After DU's statement, the counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the stand by the varsity takes care of the concern of the petitioners, since it has been clarified that they were not required to deposit any money at the time of contesting elections.
“Accordingly, with the aforesaid clarification, the present writ petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of,” the Court said.
Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Raja Choudhary, Ms. Anushika Mishra and Mr. Kapil Sharma, Advs
Counsel for Respondents: Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr. Subhrodeep Saha, Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Ms. Anamika Thakur and Mr. Abhinav Verma, Advs. for R-2/UOI; Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal and Ms. Aishwarya Malhotra, Advs
Title: ANJALI & ANR v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1042