SC takes note of disturbing pattern of student suicides; Constitutes National Task Force to prevent commission of suicides in higher educational institutions

Supreme Court: While considering the instant appeal against decision of Delhi High Court declining to issue a writ of mandamus to the Police for the purpose of registration of F.I.R. in connection with the commission of suicide by two students while they were studying at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi; the Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.*, taking note of the grim situation of rising numbers of student suicides, deemed it fit to constitute a National Task Force to address the mental health concerns of students and prevent the commission of suicides in higher educational institutions.

The Court discussed the disturbing pattern of student suicides being reported from various educational institutes across the country and opined that responsibility of maintaining the safety and well-being of students rests heavily on the administration of every educational institution. Therefore, in the event of any unfortunate incident, such as a suicide occurring on campus, it becomes their unequivocal duty to promptly lodge an F.I.R. with the appropriate authorities. Such action is not only a legal obligation but also a moral imperative to ensure transparency, accountability, and the pursuit of justice. Simultaneously, it is incumbent upon the police authorities to act with diligence and responsibility by registering the FIR without refusal or delay.

Vis-a-vis the facts of the instant case, the Court directed the DCP (South-West District, New Delhi) to register the First Information Report in line with two respective complaints lodged in writing by the kith and kin of the two students who committed suicide and depute any responsible officer, not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, to undertake the investigation in accordance with law.

Court’s Assessment:

The Court noted that 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. Referring to several reports and studies, the Court pointed out that the number of student suicides has now surpassed suicides committed by farmers due to agrarian distress, with a four percent rise in 2024 alone.

“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 Court further pointed out that suicide epidemic in educational institutions can be attributed to a plethora of factors including but not limited to academic pressure, caste-based discrimination, financial stress, and sexual harassment, with eminent institutions like the IITs and NITs reporting high rates linked to exam failures.

The Court further took note of steps taken by the UGC via University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2025, whose object is to ensure a safe, inclusive, and equitable learning environment for all students, faculty members, and staff by preventing any form of discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth within Higher Educational Institutions.

“The relentless pressure to perform in a purely score-based education system, coupled with the extreme competition for limited seats in premier educational institutions, places a terrifying burden on the students’ mental health”.

The Court further highlighted ‘ragging’ in institutions to be another primary cause of student suicides. It was noted that ragging is often concealed by colleges and universities to safeguard their reputation. This violates the right to dignity and education of students.

The Court opined 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 failure to do so would mean failing the very purpose of education — to uplift, empower, and transform lives. Universities assume the role of a parent when a student leaves his home and comes to study on the campus of the university. 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 intertest and welfare of the students.

Constitution of National Task Force to address mental health concerns of students:

With the afore-stated observations, the Court thus directed the constitution of a National Task Force to address the mental health concerns of students and prevent the commission of suicides in Higher Educational Institutions.

The Court appointed the following as Members of the Task Force:

1. Justice (retd.) S. Ravindra Bhat, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India, as Chairperson

2. Dr. Alok Sarin, Sitaram Bhartia Institute of Science & Research, New Delhi, as Consultant Psychiatrist;

3. Prof. Mary E. John (retired), Former Director, Centre for Women’s Development Studies, New Delhi;

4. Arman Ali, Executive Director, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People;

5. Prof. Rajendar Kachroo, Founder, Aman Satya Kachroo Trust;

6. Dr. Aqsa Shaikh, Professor of the Department of Community Medicine in Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, New Delhi;

7. Dr. Seema Mehrotra, Professor of Clinical Psychology, NIMHANS;

8. Prof. Virginius Xaxa, Visiting Professor at the Institute for Human Development (IHD), New Delhi;

9. Dr. Nidhi S. Sabharwal, Associate Professor, Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi;

10. Aparna Bhat, Senior Advocate (as amicus curiae).

Ex-officio members

1. Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Government of India

2. Secretary, Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Government of India;

3. Secretary, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India;

4. Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.

Responsibilities of the National Task Force:

• Identification of the predominant causes which lead to commission of suicides by students.

• Thorough analysis of Existing Regulations

• Recommendations for Strengthening Protections

The Court clarified that the term “Higher Educational Institution” is used broadly to cover all higher educational institutions, including government and private universities, deemed to be universities, government and private colleges, etc.

Further Directions:

• The Court further directed the Chief Secretaries of all the States/Union Territories to nominate a high ranking officer, not below the rank of Joint Secretary in the Department of Higher Education of the respective State/Union Territory, to act as the nodal officer on behalf of the respective State/Union Territory.

• All the concerned departments/authorities of the respective State/Union Territory to cooperate with the nodal officer concerned and furnish necessary information, data and assistance as may be sought by such nodal officer.

• The Joint Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Government of India shall act as the convener of the Task Force.

• The Central Government, the Governments of all the States/Union Territories and agencies thereof, and Universities shall extend their full and active cooperation to the Task Force and provide the requisite data, information and assistance, as may be necessary. In the case of delay, reluctance or neglect, the Task Force will be at liberty to approach the Supreme Court through the amicus curiae seeking remedial actions.

• The Court directed the Union of India to deposit an amount of Rupees Twenty Lacs (Rs 20,00,000/-) with the Registry within two weeks from the date of the order as an outlay for the initial operations of the Task Force. The amicus curiae shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application seeking orders for disbursement of any additional funds, whenever necessary. It was clarified that this amount is in addition to the financial and administrative responsibility of the Ministry of Education.

• The Court requested the Task Force to present its interim report within 4 months from the date of the instant order.