Sradha’s suicide sheds light on harassments students faced at Amal Jyothi Collegetext_fields
Kottayam: The tragic death of a 20-year-old student, Sradha Satheesh, at Amal Jyothi College of Engineering has ignited a wave of protests on campus, shedding light on the rampant harassment endured by students within the institution.
Reports have emerged of moral policing, slut-shaming, and the unauthorized videography of female students in the name of maintaining discipline. The college's response to Sradha's death, marked by a lack of acknowledgement, further fuelled the outrage among the student body.
As the protests gained momentum, students were met with aggressive actions from the police, who manhandled them and confined them within the hostels at the behest of the college administration.
Shockingly, students also reported religious discrimination by certain staff members. According to witnesses, a faculty member teaching physical education attempted to provoke the situation by singling out protesting students based on their religious attire. This divisive tactic further escalated tensions.
The underlying issues that triggered the protests at Amal Jyothi College of Engineering have been long-standing and pervasive. Numerous students have come forward to share their experiences of harassment, highlighting a culture of constant surveillance and mistreatment masked as disciplinary measures.
Female students described instances of intrusive behaviour, wherein the college manager would videotape them without consent while interacting with male peers. These videos would then be used to confiscate their ID cards and inform their parents, often blowing the incidents out of proportion, according to a report published in The News Minute.
Moreover, male students were not spared from the college's strict enforcement of rules. One student was quoted by TNM revealing that he and a friend were suspended for merely talking to female students, falsely accused of drug use, without any proper investigation conducted by the college.
The student disclosed that the college manager even acknowledged their hostel warden's inappropriate behaviour towards female students during a mediation meeting, indicating multiple complaints had been lodged against her.
Restrictions on students' daily lives extended to trivial matters such as laughter, with a curfew on laughter imposed after 8:30 pm. Making phone calls after that time, even in emergencies, was strictly prohibited.
Students claimed they were compelled to write apology letters for the smallest infractions, including laughter, bathing, and even sneezing. These oppressive measures were enforced with the utmost seriousness by the college, especially by the hostel warden Sr Maya, who wielded significant influence over the students' lives.