Finally, Punishment: 11 Expelled for Ragging Death

Sabaragamuwa University ragging inquiry leads to the expulsion of 11 students over abuse linked to the 2025 death of Charith Dilshan.

---

COLOMBO — Sabaragamuwa University has expelled 11 students following an internal investigation into ragging linked to the death of 23-year-old engineering technology undergraduate Charith Dilshan, bringing one of Sri Lanka’s most disturbing recent university ragging cases back into national focus.

The University Council imposed the disciplinary action after considering recommendations from a special committee that examined allegations of harassment and physical and psychological abuse involving Dilshan and other students.

Recent reports also state that disciplinary action was taken against three additional students, although publicly available accounts differ over the precise nature of the sanctions imposed on those students.

Those expelled have had their university registrations permanently revoked and will no longer enjoy the rights or privileges granted to internal students.

They have also been prohibited from entering university premises, faculties, hostels or other property administered by the university without the Vice-Chancellor’s prior written permission.

The decision follows more than a year of investigations into the circumstances surrounding Dilshan’s death on April 29, 2025, after his family and fellow students alleged that he had endured severe ragging shortly before returning home.

A Family’s Hope Ended in Tragedy

Dilshan was a second-year student in the Department of Engineering Technology at Sabaragamuwa University.

His father later recalled the hopes the family had placed in his education, saying he had imagined one day seeing his son return home wearing the uniform of the Laxapana Power Station, where Dilshan hoped to work.

Instead, the family lost him at the age of 23.

Dilshan died by suicide at his home in the Gampola area on April 29, 2025.

His death triggered public outrage after friends and relatives began describing what they said had happened during his visit to the university days earlier.

Family members alleged that the abuse was not an isolated incident, with his father saying his son had experienced ragging during much of his two years at university.

April 26 Visit Became the Focus of the Investigation

Dilshan had travelled to the university on April 26, 2025, reportedly to resolve an issue connected with his Mahapola scholarship.

Although second-year students were at the time following some academic work online, he visited the campus and later participated in university activities surrounding the Sinhala and Tamil New Year period.

Accounts from his family and fellow students subsequently alleged that senior students targeted him after he was seen wearing shorts.

What followed, according to those accounts, went far beyond teasing or initiation.

His mother told reporters that her son had been beaten with belts, stripped and subjected to severe humiliation.

When Dilshan returned home on April 28, his aunt said he described being tied up, dragged into a room and having his head struck against a wall in front of others.

She recalled that he became tearful while recounting what had happened.

Other accounts emerging after his death alleged that he had been subjected to degrading treatment during the episode, including being humiliated over his clothing and physically assaulted.

These claims became central to both the police investigation and the university’s own disciplinary inquiry.

Family Described Severe Mental Distress

Relatives said Dilshan appeared deeply disturbed after returning home.

His mother recalled that he avoided looking directly at family members and appeared to be carrying an intense emotional burden.

She also said he had written about experiencing mental stress before his death.

His father maintained that the April incident should not be viewed in isolation, alleging that his son had faced ragging throughout his university life.

The family’s public appeal was straightforward: what happened to Charith should never happen to another student.

That plea helped intensify public scrutiny of ragging at State universities and the ability of university administrations to detect and prevent abuse before it escalates.

Police and CID Opened Investigations

A formal complaint was lodged with Samanalawewa Police shortly after Dilshan’s death, alleging that ragging had contributed to it.

Police subsequently recorded statements from numerous university students, including others who said they had also been subjected to ragging.

On May 3, 2025, the investigation was transferred to the Criminal Investigation Department on the instructions of the Acting Inspector General of Police.

Several students were arrested during the initial stages of the investigation, while additional suspects later surrendered or were taken into custody.

Contemporary reports eventually stated that 14 students had been arrested or proceeded against in connection with the allegations.

The investigation ran separately from the internal university disciplinary process.

That distinction remains important because university expulsion is an administrative sanction, while criminal responsibility must be determined through the courts.

University Inquiry Reaches Disciplinary Findings

Sabaragamuwa University also appointed a special committee to investigate the allegations.

The committee examined disciplinary offences involving the treatment of Dilshan and other students, including alleged physical and psychological threats.

Based on its recommendations, the University Council decided to revoke the studentship of 11 students.

Reports say those students have been permanently removed from the university register.

They cannot enter university grounds, faculties, hostels or other university-administered property unless they first obtain written permission from the Vice-Chancellor.

Some reports have additionally referred to disciplinary action against three other students, bringing the number affected by the broader internal process to 14.

Because reporting differs on the precise sanctions imposed on those three students, the clearest independently corroborated position is that 11 students have had their studentships permanently revoked.

Ragging Established as a Serious Factor

The Criminal Investigation Department said in June 2025 that preliminary inquiries had found that ragging contributed to Dilshan’s death.

Investigators had by then recorded statements from university administrators and students while examining the treatment he experienced before returning home.

That finding gave greater weight to concerns originally raised by Dilshan’s relatives and fellow students.

It does not, however, mean that every criminal allegation against every individual student has already been finally established in court.

Those accused in criminal proceedings remain entitled to due process and the presumption of innocence until legal proceedings are concluded.

The university, by contrast, applies its own disciplinary standards when determining whether students have breached institutional rules.

Ragging Is Already Illegal in Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka does not lack legislation prohibiting ragging.

The Prohibition of Ragging and Other Forms of Violence in Educational Institutions Act, No. 20 of 1998 criminalises ragging and other forms of violence in educational institutions.

The University Grants Commission has also issued policies and circulars requiring universities and higher education institutions to prevent ragging, investigate complaints and take disciplinary action.

An online UGC complaint mechanism allows members of the university community to report ragging, intimidation, bullying, harassment and other forms of violence.

Yet repeated cases demonstrate that the existence of laws and complaint procedures alone has not eliminated the practice.

The harder question is why students continue to believe they can humiliate, intimidate or assault fellow undergraduates in the name of tradition.

Silence Remains One of Ragging’s Strongest Weapons

Ragging survives partly because victims can be afraid to complain.

Students may fear social isolation, retaliation, physical violence or hostility from senior batches.

Others may worry that reporting abuse will permanently damage relationships within their faculty or hostel.

Dilshan’s case exposed that problem in particularly painful circumstances.

The university administration said at the time that the alleged incident had not initially reached officials through the available reporting mechanisms.

By the time the allegations became public, a young man had already died.

A complaint system therefore cannot be judged merely by whether a hotline or online form exists.

Students must believe they can use it safely and that action will follow quickly.

Supreme Court Petitions Expanded the Case

Dilshan’s death also generated legal action beyond the criminal investigation.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka filed a fundamental rights petition in the Supreme Court in May 2025 calling for stronger enforcement of anti-ragging laws and institutional accountability.

The petition named a range of State and university authorities and argued that the failure to prevent serious ragging raised questions under constitutional protections against cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and guarantees of equal protection.

Dilshan’s parents later pursued their own fundamental rights action seeking accountability and broader institutional reform.

Those proceedings place the case within a larger debate over whether authorities can be held responsible not only for direct acts of ragging, but also for failures to prevent, detect or respond to them.

Expulsion Is Serious, but Prevention Matters More

Removing students from a university is among the strongest disciplinary penalties an institution can impose.

For those expelled, the decision can permanently alter their educational and professional futures.

That severity reflects the consequences universities must attach to proven acts of serious harassment or violence.

But punishment after a death cannot be regarded as a complete solution.

The real measure of reform is whether universities can stop the next incident before another student reaches breaking point.

That requires active monitoring in hostels, confidential reporting, rapid intervention and clear accountability for administrators who fail to act on credible information.

Students must also understand from the moment they enter university that ragging is not an inherited campus tradition entitled to protection.

It is prohibited conduct that can lead to university expulsion and criminal prosecution.

Charith Dilshan’s Case Must Not Become Another Statistic

Sri Lanka has debated university ragging for decades.

Each serious incident produces condemnation, investigations and promises that the culture will change.

Yet ragging has repeatedly survived those cycles.

Dilshan’s death has now resulted in arrests, investigations, Supreme Court litigation and the permanent expulsion of 11 students.

Those consequences are substantial.

But his family’s appeal remains more important than the punishment itself.

They wanted a system in which another parent would not have to discover only after tragedy that a child had been suffering in silence.

Universities cannot undo what happened to Charith Dilshan.

They can decide whether his death becomes another entry in the history of ragging or the point at which institutions finally make clear that humiliation, intimidation and violence have no place in higher education.