Delhi High Court's Fiery Rebuke: Luxury Cars in DUSU Polls Draw Judicial Ire

The hallowed halls of justice echoed with profound disappointment as the Delhi High Court lambasted the extravagant and often vulgar display of wealth in the Delhi University Students' Union (DUSU) election campaigns. In a scathing observation that cut through the usual legal decorum, the court declared itself "most disappointed with students" over the blatant use of luxury vehicles, a stark symbol of lavish spending that contravenes the very spirit of fair and accessible student politics.

The judicial broadside came during a hearing on a plea filed by the National Students' Union of India (NSUI), seeking directives for transparent and equitable DUSU elections.

Justice Subramonium Prasad expressed grave concern, noting that the ostentatious campaigns, replete with high-end cars, not only pointed to the "misuse of money" but also hinted at an underlying "muscle power" influencing the electoral process. This behavior, the court underscored, flies directly in the face of the recommendations made by the esteemed Lyngdoh Committee, which explicitly capped election expenditure at a meager Rs 5,000 per candidate.

Pondering the glaring disparity, the court questioned the financial source behind such opulent campaigns.

"Where does all this money come from? How can students, who are not supposed to have significant independent incomes, afford to spend so lavishly?" Justice Prasad queried, highlighting the systemic failure to adhere to guidelines designed to level the playing field. The Lyngdoh Committee's intent was clear: to foster an environment where talent and ideas, rather than financial might, determine leadership.

The current spectacle, however, suggests a stark deviation.

Beyond the financial impropriety, the High Court also turned its critical gaze to the rampant defacement of public and private property, an perennial blight of student elections. Posters and graffiti marring walls and public spaces drew sharp condemnation, with the court stressing the importance of accountability.

It was suggested that candidates found responsible for such defacement should face severe penalties, reinforcing the message that aspiring leaders must first respect public order and property.

In a powerful admonition, the court reminded the students that they are not just candidates, but future leaders of the nation.

The standards they set today, the ethical framework they embody, will inevitably shape their trajectory and influence the broader political landscape. The message was unequivocal: student politics should be a crucible for principled leadership, not a playground for unchecked excess. The court, in essence, called for a return to the foundational values of democratic participation, urging students to uphold the integrity of the electoral process for the sake of their own future and the nation's.