Navi Mumbai court issues process against Agnel Law College principal, director for fee overcharge

MUMBAI: A judicial magistrate court in Navi Mumbai ordered the issuance of process against the principal and director of Agnel School of Law, Vashi, in connection with a complaint alleging overcharging of fees in violation of the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Fees) Act, 2015.

AA Babar, Judicial Magistrate First Class Court Belapur, directed the issuance of process under Section 227 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for offences punishable under Sections 318(3) and 316(1) of the BNS, 2023.The complaint, filed by a former student, alleges that the college collected Rs. 8,000 per annum in excess of the fee fixed by the Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA), resulting in overcharges of Rs.

24,000 over a three-year period (2020–2023). It is alleged that the approved annual fee was Rs. 24,030, while the college charged Rs. 32,030. Despite attempts to resolve the issue internally with the college principal, Dr Rajesh Sakhare, and director, Dr Ambrish Patnigere, the complainant claims that no assurance was given regarding a refund of the excess fees. With no recourse left, the student approached Vashi Police Station and subsequently moved the court.

The advocate representing the respondent institution argued that the dispute is civil in nature, falling within the purview of the Fee Regulatory Authority, and challenged the complainant’s locus standi. The respondent also placed on record a compliance report submitted to FRA dated April 5, 2024, and a copy of the relevant state legislation to support their claim. Repeated calls to Dr Patnigere went unanswered.

College lawyer Sanjana Mandlik also refused to talk on the issue.However, after a detailed review of the complaint, supporting documents, and verification statement on oath, the magistrate held that there exists prima facie material to proceed and ascertain the respondent’s defence. The court emphasised that a matter may give rise to both civil and criminal liability and rejected the argument that the criminal complaint could not be entertained solely because a civil remedy was available.“A law college, which imparts legal education, is supposed to be the most important pillar in shaping an advocate’s ethics and principles, and if they themselves start cheating their students, what kind of quality advocacy can we expect in this country? Therefore, complainant Venkatesh Jairam decided to take a stand,” said Vinay V Nair, counsel for the complainant.The magistrate also directed the office to re-register the matter as a regular criminal case and update the case records accordingly.