Delhi University: Rs 1-lakh bond for student polls sparks protests

The Delhi University administration’s recent notification mandating a bond of Rs 1 lakh for candidates contesting the upcoming Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) elections has triggered an unprecedented wave of opposition from various student groups.

In a rare show of consensus, student organisations across the political spectrum, from Left to Right, have called out the move as exclusionary and undemocratic, arguing that it effectively shuts out ordinary students from contesting the polls.

Left-leaning groups, including the Students’ Federation of India (SFI) and the All India Students’ Association (AISA), have announced that they will challenge the notification in the Delhi High Court.

Also read: Is DU ready for 4th-year UG programme? Principals, teachers raise concerns

The Aam Aadmi Party’s revamped student wing – Association of Students for Alternative Politics (ASAP) – which is contesting the DUSU elections for the first time, has also protested the move, saying it goes against their core politics as it excludes common students.

Interestingly, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-backed Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) and the Congress-affiliated National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) are also opposing the move. The DUSU elections are scheduled for September 18.

Decision taken in wake of 2024 controversy

The notification, issued on August 8, requires candidates to sign the bond as a preventive measure against property defacement during elections. The decision was taken due to the controversy around the DUSU elections last year.

Also read: DU UG admissions: Over 72,000 accept allotted seats

The Delhi High Court intervened, citing widespread defacement of campus property during the campaigning period. The court mandated that the university ensure a complete cleanup before proceeding with vote counting, delaying the announcement of results by nearly two months.

While the DU administration views this as a step to curb vandalism, student groups argue that it effectively bars students from low-income and middle-class backgrounds from participating.

Student outfits protest

The ABVP has staged demonstrations across colleges, demanding the withdrawal of the bond. Branding the move as undemocratic, ABVP Delhi state secretary Sarthak Sharma said, “It prevents ordinary students from contesting students’ union elections and goes against democratic principles.”

Also read: After row, St Stephen’s allows 52 students to write exams; issue runs deeper, say critics

The NSUI, meanwhile, framed the bond as a politically motivated move to favour the ABVP, especially in the context of last year’s elections. The NSUI had won the posts of president and joint secretary, while the ABVP had won the posts of vice-president and secretary.

“NSUI supports clean and fair student elections as per the Lyngdoh Committee and court rulings — but this notification is nothing more than a political weapon to help the ruling BJP’s student organisation ABVP and target opponents,” said NSUI national president Varun Choudhary.

Also read: Delhi HC slams DU, orders regularisation of 2 ad hoc teachers

Calling the provision “unconstitutional” and without a legal basis, the NSUI pointed out that the Lyngdoh Committee Regulations allow only an expenditure cap of Rs 5,000 and no such bond.

The ASAP has denounced what it called a “Tughlaqi farman”.

At a press conference, ASAP Delhi state president Kuldeep Bidhuri alleged a conspiracy, “This is nothing but a conspiracy to directly block middle-class students from contesting elections. Only those with money will be able to contest… If a student files nominations for all four posts, where will they arrange Rs 4 lakh for the bonds?”

A senior ASAP leader told The Federal that while the organisation was against the move, it was not, as of now, considering a legal challenge like the SFI and AISA.

“We have a given call to financially support deserving candidates who want to fight the DUSU elections this time. This completely goes against our politics. But as of now, we are hoping that it will be retracted and there will be no need for a legal challenge,” the leader said.

The SFI and the AISA, however, have decided to take the legal route, as these organisations, arguably, have the most to lose. Both organisations also submitted separate memorandums to the DU administration in this regard.

SFI Delhi state committee member Sohan Kumar Yadav said, “Year after year, the DU campus has suffered at the hands of rogue organisations that spend lakhs of rupees to canvass in student areas, leading to rampant defacement of surroundings. The administration’s effort to curb this menace should be appreciated. However, imposing conditions such as a Rs 1-lakh bond on candidates is doing greater harm than good.”

The AISA echoed similar concerns during a protest on campus. In its memorandum to the chief election officer (CEO), Raj Kishore Sharma, it said, “The very object of student elections, as recognised in the Lyngdoh framework, is to nurture leadership, encourage democratic participation, and provide a platform for diverse student voices, especially from modest and middle-class families.”

“A financial qualification of Rs 1 lakh not only excludes such students but also reduces the democratic process to a privilege available only to the wealthy. The introduction of such a requirement is therefore inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the Lyngdoh Committee as well as the Supreme Court’s binding directions,” it added.

SFI Delhi president Sooraj Elamon told The Federal that the organisation was in discussion with lawyers over when to approach the court over the matter and would make a decision soon.

While the rare convergence of voices across rival organisations highlights the gravity of the issue, the DU administration said there were “legal complications” in revoking the move.

“We have not taken a final call as yet. We are exploring various possibilities. During last year's defacement incidents, the Delhi University proposed a series of reforms for the coming elections, and the High Court accepted those and based on those, it allowed the university to declare the results. So, this is part of the reform, and in that case, it has become binding on the university,” CEO Sharma told The Federal.

He also said the reforms suggested by DU had passed through the Executive Council (EC) – the highest decision-making body of the university.

However, an EC member said the case was not as clear-cut. “Recently, they had brought forth this agenda of the changes that have to be made to the DUSU elections because of the court interventions. Then we realised that the university had already made a committee and that committee submitted some advisory recommendations or such things to the court, saying therefore that we will mend our ways,” an EC member told this publication.

“Now, when it came to EC, we objected that you’ve already sent it to the court, so how come you're bringing it right now over here? It should have been the other way around. Then they said we will think about how to go about it. But they did not bring it back to the EC,” he said.