Bombay High Court sets aside IIM Nagpur student's suspension, orders fresh inquiry

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has set aside the suspension of an MBA student of the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Nagpur. Action had been taken against him on the allegation that a banned substance was found in his hostel room. The court said he was not given adequate opportunity to present his side.

The order was passed by a division bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Raj D. Wakode. The petition before the bench was filed by Prayas Thakur, a second-year student of the 2025-27 MBA batch.

The court has directed IIM Nagpur to allow the student to attend classes and stay in the hostel until the matter is inquired into afresh.

According to the petition, institute officials searched Thakur's shared hostel room on August 30, 2026, when he was in class. The student alleges that a banned substance was said to have been found under the pillow on his bed.

Thakur says the officials did not tell him what the substance was, what it contained or how much of it there was. He was also not given any laboratory report. He further alleges that the search was conducted in his absence and that no student representative was present.

The student argued that his academic record is spotless. He said he was not given a proper chance to put forward his case before the Student Activity Committee or the appellate authorities either.

The institute had first expelled Thakur from the programme. After an appeal, the director reduced the punishment to suspension for terms 5 and 6 of the 2026-27 academic year.

Advocate Radhika Bajaj, appearing for the student, told the court that the institute did not follow a fair procedure and did not give him adequate opportunity to defend himself. Harish Thakur, counsel for the institute, defended the earlier orders but also accepted that a fresh inquiry could be held after the student was heard properly.

The bench said the student had not been given sufficient opportunity to present his side. On this ground, the High Court quashed the orders of the director, the Student Activity Committee and the Academic Programme and Grievance Redressal Committee.

The court has asked the chairperson of the Student Activity Committee to hold a fresh inquiry, examine the evidence and pass a reasoned order within four weeks. The bench made clear that the committee must decide only after hearing the student.