The vice-principal of South Calcutta Law College has written to the father of a first-year student who had accused his seniors of ragging him and snatching his phone that “the college will provide (his son) an ‘android phone’ for attending online classes”.
The student has been staying away from the college since he was allegedly harassed in the students’ union office and assaulted in early December. His smartphone was allegedly snatched during the assault.
The vice-principal wrote to the father on Wednesday night and said that after the phone is handed over on January 6, a link will be provided so his son can attend online classes.
The father wondered why the college authorities could not recover the phones — of the first-year student and his elder brother — despite them naming the offenders before a fact-finding committee.
The father also said they were not happy with the college authorities, who in their probe report said there was no case of ragging or assault.
The letter, signed by vice-principal Nayna Chatterji, said: “The college will provide an ‘android phone’ for attending online classes. You are being informed to collect the said phone on Friday from 9am to 10am. Thereafter the link will be provided by the college for online classes to the email of the student as decided by the fact-finding committee.”
Chatterji and the chairperson of the committee did not respond to calls and text messages from this newspaper.
The college sent the letter to the complainant’s father a day after the student, who had also lodged a ragging complaint on the UGC’s anti-ragging helpline, wrote to the helpline saying he was “not satisfied at all, with the behaviour of either the college or the police”.
The student told The Telegraph what happened to him was because he had dared to say he wouldn’t join the TMCP-run students’ union. This was not a case of misunderstanding, which the committee has said in the report, he said.
His father said they didn’t want to take the phone because they had not got justice. The student was allegedly ragged in the students’ union office on December 2.
“My elder son, my wife and I went to the college on December 7 because we were asked to meet the authorities after my son lodged a complaint with the vice-principal. This time, the entire family was assaulted, prompting me to lodge an FIR naming the attackers. But all we are getting is an android phone,” he said. “This is not justice.”
The student said: “As if the phone is what mattered to me the most. The college failed to provide me justice.”