St Stephen’s College in Delhi spells excellence in education. Its administrators have been eminent educationists. With these two co- ordinates, one would expect the best in academics, in governance, in discipline. The last being a distinguishing feature of all Jesuit institutions. It was, therefore, a sad disappointment to read the statements made by no less a person than the principal of the country’s most prestigious college in a national newspaper recently.

First of all, there were no remedies that he offered to end the obnoxious practice of ragging except trite ones like adopting a fatherly approach to “teetering teenage steps” or showing “compassion and a more humane” attitude to those who indulge in this cruel pastime. I am amazed that he does not talk of compassion or humanity to the victims of such pastimes!

His plea relates to the recent case of ragging in the hostel of St Stephen’s which has grabbed headlines in all leading newspapers and news channels. On the night of September 20, a fresher went to his seniors’ dormitory seeking help to fill out an application form. Fair enough.

They did not call him. He went on his own volition. The senior students (who were drunk) sprayed deodorant on his hands and legs and set them on fire calling it an experiment in magic. Naturally, the boy suffered burns. It goes without saying that he must have suffered deep trauma as well.

Principal’s words
But, strangely, the principal argues that this does not amount to ragging since the seniors did not ask the victim to visit their dorm. He went on his own. Secondly, he makes out a case that when both the victim and the raggers participate in a “prank” together, it does not amount to bullying. Further, he states that when the victim of such pranks does not choose to complain to the administration, how can we call it ragging? Excellent arguments that may win in a court of law. But which fail in the course of natural justice.

I would like to know how many victims of ragging dare to complain? As right thinking persons, should we condemn the sadistic behaviour of raggers and bullies on college campuses, or pretend that the masochistic victims are hugely enjoying themselves?

When the head of an institution, who is also the guardian of discipline in his college, blames a teenaged newcomer for not complaining to the authorities when he found his seniors drunk instead of condemning the drunken behaviour of the culprits themselves – “It would have been wiser for him to leave the room and report the matter to the dean as drinking is strictly prohibited in residence” – one wonders where his sympathies lie. What disciplinary action was taken against them for violating the rules and getting inebriated enough to cause grievous injury to their junior?
If the principal finds the latter guilty of a serious misdemeanour for having stayed on past midnight in the seniors’ dorm when the rules required that he get back to his own room by 10 pm, what steps has he taken to investigate whether the young boy was forcibly detained by his drunken seniors? And why no condemnation of their drunkenness in residence or their staying up until past midnight to play gruesome pranks on an innocent fresher?

Wealthy donors
Lastly, his argument that “a science student at the college level should have known that fire hurts” before submitting himself to the magic experiment can be turned on its head to question whether the perpetrators of the crime did not not know that the fire would grievously harm their victim? One cannot help concluding that the college seems more protective of the raggers than to the unfortunate victim of ragging.

It need hardly be mentioned that private schools and colleges like to keep cordial relations with their wealthy donors. This is one of the main reasons for the explosion of the ragging menace in such institutions.
But, one would expect a college with a 200-year-old reputation like St Stephen’s to lead the way in these matters. A college that bears the motto Ad Dei Gloriam and which had persons like CF Andrews on its faculty is too exalted an institution to be trivialised by its administrators.