HHRC seeks reports from Haryana government, UGC, police over alleged harassment of student at Sonipat university

‘Target of deliberate victimisation’

The case arises from a complaint filed by Vishav Bajaj, who alleged that his son, a student of OP Jindal Global University, was subjected to continuous harassment, humiliation and discriminatory conduct by two faculty members – Professor Ekta Chauhan and Professor Sarover Zaidi. According to the complainant, the alleged actions gravely impacted his son’s mental health, academic performance and overall sense of safety on campus, amounting to a serious violation of his human rights.

The complainant stated that his son is a meritorious student with an excellent academic and extracurricular record and has previously studied at reputed institutions. The dispute allegedly began on October 31, 2025, when the student wrote an essay on the film, URI: The Surgical Strike. The content of the essay was reportedly disapproved of by certain teachers. On November 3, 2025, during a class, the student was allegedly harassed and asked not to praise the Government of India, the prime minister and the Indian Army.

The allegations further refer to classroom remarks made on November 7, 2025, during a course titled ‘Politics of Representation,’ taught by Professor Sarover Zaidi. The complainant claimed that derogatory and inflammatory statements were made, including comparisons of the prime minister of India to Adolf Hitler and dismissive descriptions of national security operations as gimmicks or branding exercises. It was alleged that after the student had earlier expressed views supportive of the government and the armed forces, he became a target of deliberate victimisation by faculty members holding particular political views.

The complaint also highlighted an incident involving an academic review submitted by the student on the same film. Instead of being assessed on academic merit, the student was allegedly publicly humiliated in class and informed that such content would not be accepted, following which he was declared failed in the subject. However, after the student submitted a written complaint to the Vice Chancellor, an inquiry conducted by Executive Dean Badrinarayan reportedly found the failure to be unjustified. Consequently, the student’s result was revised, and he was declared passed in the internal assessment.

According to the complainant, this development allegedly led to further hostility from certain faculty members. The complainant alleged that on November 29, 2025, during a jury evaluation, a minor and inadvertent error occurred when one of the uploaded documents bore another student’s name. Although the error was corrected in time and involved no plagiarism or illegality, it was allegedly exaggerated and used as a basis to fail the student in a subject related to projection drawing.

The complainant also expressed apprehension that his son could be implicated in fabricated or frivolous allegations, alleging that the individuals concerned exercised significant influence within the university. He further claimed that on December 9, 2025, the student was summoned by the Executive Dean and was subjected to repeated pressure to withdraw his complaint. When he refused to do so, he was allegedly declared failed again in the subject.

It was further submitted that the student is currently suffering from mental and physical distress and is living under constant fear of retaliation, academic failure and institutional victimisation for having raised his grievance. The complainant further alleged that despite the matter being reported to various authorities, including the police, no action has allegedly been taken so far, prompting the complainant to approach the Human Rights Commission.