TWENTY-TWO Anjalis, two Rubinas, and more to come. The probe being conducted by JNU’s proctorial committee to identify organisers of the event held on campus this month to protest the hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru is facing a peculiar situation.
With posters for the February 9 event displaying only the first names of the 10 organisers, the committee appears to have no other option but send “call letters” to all namesakes on campus.
“For most names, we have been able to identify the person, but for some names this problem exists. Today, for example, we have sent notices to 22 people with the name Anjali, because we don’t know who the organiser was. This process helps in excluding people,” Rakesh Bhatnagar, chairman of the probe panel, told The Indian Express.
- Will enforce attendance norms: JNU new chairpersons
- JNU students, teachers stand ground, hold classes in open
- A small-minded yardstick
- Faculty selection in JNU: Cracks on campus
- JNU inquiry into Feb 9 event: Report ‘cannot identify’ centre, surnames of two students
- JNU row: Supreme Court refuses to hear Kanhaiya Kumar’s bail plea
On Wednesday, for instance, call letters were sent to two Rubinas asking them to depose before the committee on Thursday.
“One of them came to us today and told us that she wasn’t involved in the incident and was innocent. We told her to have fun and not worry about anything. This is the standard procedure we are following for people we cannot identify. There is nothing to panic about in this. The other Rubina did not appear so we got to know that she was the organiser,” said Bhatnagar.
The “call letter” sent to students reads: “An incident that took place on 9th February, 2016 near Sabarmati and Ganga Hostel is being investigated by the High Level Enquiry Committee, JNU. You are directed to appear before the Enquiry Committee on 18th February, 2016 at 3.00 pm in Room No. 108, Administrative Building, JNU, New Delhi to explain your position in this regard.
You may also bring any evidence, which you wish to submit in support of your defence.”
The letter adds: “Upon failing to present yourself on the date and time appointed for the hearing, it shall be presumed that you have nothing to say in this matter. In such circumstances, the matter will be decided in your absence.”