Report Student Suicides Immediately; None Should Be Barred From Classes, Exams For Delay In Scholarship Disbursal : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently said that it is deeply saddened and disturbed to acknowledge the increasing number of unfortunate incidents of suicides in higher educational institutions(HEIs) across the country. To prevent such incidents, it has issued some interim directions, which include that all HEIs must report incidents of suicide irrespective of whether it takes place in the hostel, paying guest accommodation or happens to an online student, and they must have round-the-clock access to qualified medical help.

It has also been directed that no institution can prevent a student from appearing in an examination, or be barred from attending classes or have their documents withheld, just because the student hasn't been able to pay the fees due to the delays in disbursal of scholarships. Consequently, it has strictly directed that all pending scholarship disbursements must be cleared within four months by the relevant central or State authorities. 

These observations were made by a bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan in follow-up to its March 24, 2025, order wherein the Court constituted a National Task Force (NTF) address mental health concerns of students and to prevent the rising suicides in higher educational institutions. Its mandate is to investigate and prevent the increasing suicide rates in college students. Chaired by former Supreme Court Judge Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, the NFT monitored suicide cases in various educational institutions across the country. 

Directions passed in a petition filed by parents of two IIT Delhi students, who allegedly committed suicide due to caste-based discrimination and academic pressure, require an institution to promptly and mandatorily register a first information report in the event of a suicide on campus.

From structured social inequalities to mass privatisation of the institutional spaces to ragging, the NFT's interim report has accorded various reasons as to why the young population remains susceptible to suicide. The report also mentions that more than 65% of institutions surveyed do not have mental health service providers. It also notes that many institutions have a policy where the student is held accountable for fees overdue, especially when there is a delay in reimbursement from the government.

In view of these reasons and the suggestions by the NTF, the Court has issued the following directions:

1. 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 mechanisms for obtaining and maintaining the same, may be developed with the help of experts in the field of public health and demography.

2. The NCRB, in its annual report, must distinguish between school-going students and students of higher education in its categorisation of “student suicides” in order to aid the study of the trends of student suicides in HEIs.

3. 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 as soon as they come to know about the incident. This should cover all students - irrespective of whether they are studying in the classroom, distance or online mode of learning.  

4. 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.). In case of Central Universities and Institutes of National Importance (for short, the “INIs”), or any HEI that does not fall within the above-mentioned framework, it must be reported to the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Government of India.

5. 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.

6.  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. Special recruitment drives may be held for faculty recruitment that come under various forms of reservations as per central and state government rules.

7. Appointment and filling of vacancies of the post of Vice Chancellor, Registrars,and other key institutional/administrative positions, must also be made within a period of four months. Moreover, it must be ensured as a matter of practice that, these positions are filled within a period of one month from the date on which the vacancy arises, in order to ensure the smooth functioning of HEIs.

Since the date of retirement is known much ahead in time, recruitment processes must begin well in advance to ensure that such posts do not remain vacant for more than a month. All HEIs must report on an annual basis to the Central and relevant State Governments, as to how many reserved posts are vacant, how many are filled, reasons for non-filling, time taken, etc., so that periodic accountability is ensured.

8. 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. If there exists any reason behind the non-disbursal of the same, a notice with reasons must be sent to the relevant HEI along with the student recipient, within a period of two months. It must be ensured that the disbursement of all future scholarships are done with clear timelines, without any delay by the relevant Central and State Government authorities.

Disbursal dates and schedules must also be made known to the student recipient. Even in cases of unavoidable administrative delay, HEIs must not, as a policy, make the student recipients accountable for paying or clearing their fees. No student should be prevented from appearing in an examination, removed from hostels, barred from attending classes, or have their marksheets and degrees withheld because of delays in disbursal of scholarships. Any such institutional policy, may be viewed strictly. 

9. All HEIs, are particularly put to strict notice, to remain fully compliant with all the regulations that have a binding effect on them including inter-alia the UGC Regulation on Curbing the Menace of Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions, 2009; the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012; the UGC (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2016; the UGC (Redressal of Grievances of Students) Regulations, 2023, amongst others.

More, particularly, the establishment of Anti-Ragging Committees and Anti-Ragging Squads, Anti-Discrimination Officers, Internal Complaints Committees and Student Grievance Redressal Committees along with the procedures detailed for the respective grievance redressal mechanisms, must be strictly adhered to.  

The Court has made it clear that non-compliance by the institutions would lead to serious consequences. The Court has asked the NTF to suggest a model 'Suicide Prevention and Postvention Protocol' which addresses all issues including ragging, sexual harrasment, etc which can be adopted by the HEIs.

Headnote

Campus Suicide – Mandatory registration of FIR – Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) - Institutional Responsibility vs. Student Autonomy - Mandatory Directions under Article 142 - The Supreme Court addressed the alarming rise in student suicides across Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in India - Recognized student suicide as the "visible tip of a much larger iceberg of student distress," Supreme Court noted that the legal and moral obligation of educational authorities to create safe, inclusive, and nurturing environments - Supreme Court reviewed an interim report by a National Task Force (NTF) and issued several mandatory directions under Article 142 of the Constitution to address structural, social, and academic stressors - Key Legal Issues & Rulings held – i. Mandatory Registration of F.I.R. for Campus Suicides – Noted that educational institutions have an unequivocal legal obligation to promptly lodge an F.I.R. with appropriate authorities if an incident of suicide occurs on campus - This follows the clarification of law regarding mandatory registration of F.I.R.s in the event of disclosure of a cognizable offence; ii. Institutional Responsibility vs. Student Autonomy - Supreme Court criticized the tendency of HEIs to "shift the blame" onto the individual autonomy of the deceased student to avoid institutional responsibility - held that HEIs cannot shirk their fundamental duty to ensure institutions are safe and conducive spaces for learning; iii. Mandatory Directions under Article 142 - Data Maintenance: SRS data on suicides for the 15-29 age group must be centrally maintained - The NCRB must distinguish between school-going and higher education students in its reports; iv. Reporting Protocol - HEIs must report all student suicides or unnatural deaths (on or off-campus) to police immediately - Annual reports of such incidents must be submitted to regulatory bodies like UGC, NMC, BCI, etc; v. Faculty Vacancies - All vacant faculty positions, with priority to reserved categories (SC/ST/OBC/PwD), must be filled within four months; vi. Scholarship Disbursements: Pending scholarship backlogs must be cleared within four months - HEIs are strictly prohibited from barring students from exams or hostels due to administrative delays in scholarship disbursals; vii. Regulatory Compliance - HEIs must strictly adhere to UGC regulations concerning Ragging (2009), Equity (2012), Sexual Harassment (2016), and Grievance Redressal (2023); viii. Accessibility and Mental Health - Supreme Court mandated accessibility audits for marginalized groups (PwDs and Transgender students) and emphasized the need for student-friendly mental health services provided by qualified professionals rather than untrained faculty members. [Relied on Sukdeb Saha v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1515; Paras 19-39; 44, 45]