Guilt of Medical Negligence Cannot Be Made Out Merely by Allegation Without Expert Evidence: Supreme Court Partially Modifies NCDRC Order in Hospital Liability Case “There Is No Presumption That Property Remains Joint After Partition” – Supreme Court Restores Validity of Sale by Coparcener Holding Self-Acquired Property Fresh Suit Maintainable Even After Rejection of Restoration Application Under Order IX Rule 4 CPC:  Supreme Court Upholds High Court’s Decree Restoring Plaintiffs' Rights Academic Futures Can’t Be Sacrificed at the Altar of Lease Formalities: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Save Hotel Management Institute Disregarding a Court's Order May Seem Bold, But the Shadows of Its Consequences Are Long and Cold: Supreme Court Sentences Shaji Augustine for Civil Contempt States Must Act to Eliminate Gender Disparities and Ensure Transparency in Organ Transplants: Supreme Court Issues Comprehensive Directions Deliberate Crushing Under Tractor Wheels Establishes Murder, Not Accident: Allahabad High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 302 IPC Caveat Cannot Be Sidestepped On Ground Of Urgency Or Identity Ambiguity: Calcutta High Court Quashes Injunction Order Passed Without Notice To Caveator Admission by Defendant is the Best Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Reiterates Protection of Possession in Injunction Suits Freedom of Speech Cannot Shield Influencers Who Circulate Unverified Allegations Against Brands: Delhi High Court Talaq-e-Ahsan Is Not Criminalized Under Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act: Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Protection under Section 197 CrPC is Not a Cloak for Unlawful Acts Committed Outside Official Duty: Rajasthan High Court Advocate Betraying Client’s Trust to Usurp Property is the Worst Abuse of Professional Ethics: Madras High Court Rent Controller Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Leave To Defend Under Section 13-B Rent Act: Punjab and Haryana High Court Partition Deed Must Be Proven By Primary Evidence If Execution Is Disputed: Jharkhand High Court Annuls Appellate Decree

Supreme Court Sets Up National Task Force to Combat Student Suicides in Higher Educational Institutions

14 April 2025 3:28 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Universities must act in loco parentis – not just to ensure academic excellence but to ensure students' mental well-being - In a landmark order Supreme Court of India constituted a National Task Force to address the alarming rise in student suicides across Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in the country. The direction came in the backdrop of two disturbing cases of alleged caste-based harassment leading to suicide at IIT Delhi.
A Bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, while dealing with the case titled Amit Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., underscored that "universities assume the role of a parent when a student leaves home and comes to study on the campus of the university." The Court asserted that the failure of institutions to ensure student well-being is "a failure of the very purpose of education – to uplift, empower, and transform lives."
Student Suicides Are Not Isolated Incidents, But a National Crisis
The Supreme Court took judicial notice of recent student suicides in premier institutions and observed, “the above-mentioned incidents are not isolated one-off occurrences but are only a few out of the many which have taken place over a period of time owing to a multitude of reasons like ragging, academic pressure, caste-based discrimination, sexual harassment, etc.”
The Court referred to official data submitted before the Rajya Sabha in 2023 and remarked, “as per the data provided by the Union Minister of State for Education to the Rajya Sabha in 2023, 98 students died by suicide in higher educational institutes since 2018, out of which 39 were from IITs, 25 from NITs, 25 from central universities, four from IIMs, three from IISERs and two from IIITs.”
In the words of the Bench, “each suicide is a personal tragedy that prematurely takes the life of an individual and has a continuing ripple effect, affecting the lives of families, friends and communities.”

Caste-Based Discrimination and Institutional Apathy Under the Scanner
The Court was unequivocal in condemning caste-based discrimination in higher education and said, “caste-based discrimination on college campuses is in clear violation of Article 15 of the Constitution which inter alia prohibits discrimination on the ground of caste.”
Taking note of the drop-out rates, the Court observed, “in response to a question put up in the Rajya Sabha in 2021, the Ministry of Education submitted that 60% of the students who dropped-out from seven reputed IITs belonged to the reserved categories.”
In strongly worded remarks, the Court noted, “what disturbs us even more is the rising number of suicides being reported from various educational institutes across the country… these tragedies underscore the urgent need for a more robust, comprehensive, and responsive mechanism.”
"Suicide Is a Systemic Failure" – Supreme Court on Institutional Accountability
Criticizing the widespread institutional neglect, the Bench observed, “when academic environments fail to address discrimination, harassment, and mental health concerns effectively, they contribute to a culture of neglect that can have devastating consequences.”
Citing a survey conducted by researcher Seena Mary Thankachan at Pune International Centre, the Court recorded that “70% of the faculty members across IITs felt ill-equipped to address mental health issues, and 90% lacked proper training to support students with such sensitive concerns.”
The Court said the current education system places a “terrifying burden on the students’ mental health” and lamented that “several students who come from competitive coaching centres bring pre-existing mental health issues, which get further heightened when they enter Higher Educational Institutions.”
On the issue of ragging, the Court observed, “another cause of student suicides remains brutality in the form of ragging, which is often concealed by colleges and universities to safeguard their reputation.”
In an emotional note, the Court declared, “the nation has already suffered the tragic loss of numerous students – young individuals with immense potential… due to the absence of adequate institutional support, they were driven to take the extreme step of ending their own lives.”
National Task Force Constituted to Tackle the Student Suicide Crisis
To address the crisis, the Court directed the constitution of a National Task Force, stating, “we believe that it is high time we take cognizance of this serious issue and formulate comprehensive and effective guidelines to address and mitigate the underlying causes contributing to such distress among students.”
The Task Force will be chaired by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, and will comprise experts from fields of psychiatry, psychology, education, disability rights, and public policy. The Court emphasised, “the Task Force includes representatives from diverse fields to ensure an interdisciplinary approach to tackling the issue.”
The Court clarified that “the remit of this Task Force is to prepare a comprehensive report that includes identification of the predominant causes which lead to commission of suicides by students.”
It further directed that “the Task Force shall have the authority to conduct surprise inspections of any Higher Educational Institution.”
The Bench instructed, “the Ministry of Education, Government of India shall provide all necessary logistical support to facilitate the functioning of the Task Force,” and directed the Union of India to “deposit an amount of Rupees Twenty Lacs (₹20,00,000/-) with the Registry within two weeks from the date of this order as an outlay for the initial operations of the Task Force.”
"Colleges Must Not Only Impart Knowledge, But Protect Dignity and Life": Supreme Court
Reiterating the doctrine of loco parentis, the Court observed, “as per the principle of loco parentis, when a student at the adolescent age or childhood is sent to school by the parents, it is also the duty of the school authorities to play the role of parents in safeguarding the interest and welfare of the students.”
The Court added that “the duty of the college authorities is not just to ensure academic excellence of the students but also to ensure their mental well-being, and not just exercise authority and control over students but also to provide support in times of distress.”
In a powerful reminder of institutional responsibility, the Bench declared, “we are of the firm view that universities must acknowledge their role not just as centres of learning but as institutions responsible for the well-being and holistic development of their students.”
The Supreme Court’s order in Amit Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. is a clarion call to the nation’s educational institutions, compelling them to recognize the urgent crisis of student suicides as not just a mental health issue but a failure of institutional empathy and legal accountability.

By setting up the National Task Force, the Court has provided a mechanism to investigate, reform, and reimagine the environment of India’s higher education campuses. The message is clear and forceful: “As a society, and as stakeholders in shaping the future of our youth, we must take collective responsibility to ensure that no more lives are lost due to apathy or indifference.”
The matter remains part-heard and has been listed for further hearing in four months, post submission of the interim report by the Task Force.

 

Date of Decision: 24th March 2025
 

Latest News