Supreme Court Addresses Issue Of Student Suicides In Higher Educational Institutions; Asks NTF To Come Up With Model Suicide Prevention & Postvention Protocol

The Apex Court highlighted the disturbing pattern of student suicides being reported from various educational institutions across the country while affirming the need to build a robust institutionalised response for ensuring the mental well-being of students studying in Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs).

The Division Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan stated, “What we wish to achieve through the aforesaid and also hope from the NTF is that they suggest a model ‘Universal Design Framework’ or a model ‘Suicide Prevention and Postvention Protocol’ or a model ‘Student well-being Protocol’ which cohesively and comprehensively incorporates the aforementioned model SOPs, the existing guidelines on ragging, promotion of equity, sexual harassment, etc., and any other relevant measures which they may consider necessary, into one single guiding document.”

The Court noted that the NTF had moved one step further to look into the submerged sections of the ‘ice-berg of student distress’ to offer some structural, preventive and sustainable solutions to the system and functioning of higher education in India. Considering the manner of expansion of the Higher Education System in the country, the Bench stated that this growth has brought with it some substantial challenges and unprecedented pressure on academic standards. “The purely quantitative expansion without any adequate institutional support framework, has left students vulnerable, as is directly evidenced by the recurring instances of campus tragedies”, it added.

Addressing the persistent structural inequalities that students may be confronted with, post their entry into college and mentioning how the lived realities of students belonging to marginalised groups (SC/ST/OBC), persons with disabilities (PwDs), transgender persons, women, students from rural backgrounds, non-English speaking students etc. remain different even within the college atmosphere, the Bench mentioned some support systems which include the existence of well-functioning Equal Opportunity Cells/Centres (EOCs) as mandated by the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012.

The Bench further affirmed the need for initiatives which would foster more inclusivity, including but not limited to language development centres and structured initiatives that facilitate English language training for students educated in vernacular/regional languages, so that they can handle the exclusively English-medium pedagogy and English-dominated social environment.

“Especially in the context of EOCs and ICCs, what has been gathered from some first-hand accounts of students and faculty members from the online survey and the institutional visits of the NTF, is deeply disheartening. Though these bodies may find existence in several institutions, they lack independence and often work to favour the perpetrators or aggressors rather than the students for whom it was created. Cases are suppressed and proceedings are often biased. This also induces fears of academic or social backlash in students and prevents them from accessing grievance redressal mechanisms”, the order read.

Taking note of the menace of ragging which still seems to persist within several HEIs, with the same also being normalised and touted as a “bonding exercise” or a “friendly ice-breaking effort”, the Bench stated, “However, what seems to be the concern of many is that while HEIs obtain anti-ragging declarations from students on paper, in the event of such incidents occurring, they are not properly addressed and the consequences for erring students are minimal or absent.”

The Bench stressed the importance of Mental Health Service Providers (MHSPs) in campus ecosystems, which is especially important if one conceptualises student mental health as a continuum, extending beyond clinical diagnoses to encompass broader well-being and suicide prevention efforts. The Bench also enumerated the policies spearheaded by the University Grants Commission (UGC), which address suicides and the issues leading to suicides in India.

The Bench stated, “However, if we are to keep student well-being in HEIs at the forefront, we would have to close these gaps, with the help of the NTF and the Union of India, and put all HEIs to notice that non-compliance will carry some commensurate and serious consequences. We have taken such a firm view also considering that a majority of the HEIs have not even shown any initiative in doing the bare-minimum i.e., providing relevant information by responding to the online survey conducted by the NTF, despite several reminders given on behalf of the Union of India.”

Thus, in light of the recommendations of the NTF, the Bench issued the following directions in exercise of our plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India:

• The Sample Registration System data on Suicides, especially those falling within the age group of 15-29 years, must be centrally maintained for better and more accurate estimates of Deaths by Suicide of students in HEIs.
• The NCRB, in its annual report, must distinguish between school-going students and students of higher education in its Page 28 of 38 categorisation of “student suicides” in order to aid the study of the trends of student suicides in HEIs.
• All HEIs must report any incident of suicide or unnatural death of a student, regardless of the location of its occurrence (i.e. on campus, hostels, PG accommodations, or otherwise outside the institutional premises), to the police authorities no sooner they come to know about the incident.
• In addition to the above, an annual report of student suicides or unnatural deaths must also be submitted to the UGC & all other relevant regulatory bodies for professional courses (e.g. AICTE, NMC, DCI, BCI etc.).
• Every residential HEI must have access to qualified medical help round the clock, if not on campus, then within a one-km radius to provide emergency medical health support to students.

The Bench further directed, “Keeping in mind the faculty shortages which have been reported in several HEIs, both public and private, it must be ensured that all vacant faculty positions (both teaching and non-teaching) be filled within a period of four months, with priority given to posts reserved for candidates from marginalized and underrepresented communities including those posts reserved for PwDs.”

“The backlog of any and all pending scholarship disbursements must be cleared within a period of four months by the relevant Central and State government authorities”, it ordered. Asking all the HEIs to remain fully compliant with all the regulations that have a binding effect on them, the Bench requested the NTF to assist the Court in certain aspects includign the creation of a model SOP for periodic “well-being audits” which may be conducted in HEIs, creation of a model SOP for faculty sensitisation and training which may include the frequency at which such training must be conducted as well as creation of a model SOP for Mental Health Services which is to be provided for students in HEIs.

Cause Title: Amit Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 62)

Click here to read/download Order