New Delhi- A rising number of suicides and suicide attempts among students across educational institutions in India has alarmed the nation. Incidents such as the recent suicide attempt at FM College in Balasore have triggered widespread concern and deep unease. Responding to these disturbing developments, the Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over the inability of institutions to curb such tragedies, calling it a systemic failure.
In Odisha, reports of suicides and attempts by female students and young women have become increasingly frequent. Within just four days, ten young women reportedly consumed poison, with many receiving treatment at the district headquarters hospital. These shocking cases have intensified public anxiety and placed a spotlight on mental health in education.
In a landmark decision driven by rising student suicides, the Supreme Court of India has issued binding guidelines mandating psychological safeguards and regulatory mechanisms across all educational institutions. The ruling, pronounced by a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, applies to schools, colleges, universities, coaching centres, training academies, and hostels across the country. Exercising powers under Articles 32 and 141 of the Constitution, the Court declared that these guidelines would hold the force of law until Parliament enacts formal legislation.
The trigger for the ruling was the suicide of a 17-year-old NEET aspirant, referred to as Ms X, in July 2023 while attending Aakash Byju’s coaching institute in Visakhapatnam. Responding to a petition filed by her father, the Court transferred the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation, overriding an earlier dismissal by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Court observed that such tragedies are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a larger structural crisis in the Indian education system. Citing data from the National Crime Records Bureau, the Court noted that India reported 170,924 suicides in 2022, with students making up 7.6 percent of these deaths — a staggering 13,044 lives lost, over 2,200 of which were directly attributed to exam failure.
In response to this crisis, the Court laid down a uniform set of mental health protocols inspired by frameworks like UMMEED, MANODARPAN, and the National Suicide Prevention Strategy. Every institution with more than 100 students is now required to employ at least one qualified mental health professional such as a psychologist, counselor, or psychiatric social worker. Smaller institutions must establish formal referral systems with external mental health experts. Campuses are required to display suicide prevention helpline numbers such as Tele-MANAS in prominent locations including hostels, classrooms, common areas, and institutional websites.
To reduce academic stress, the Court ordered an end to batch segregation and public shaming based on academic performance, especially in coaching centres. Staff members must be trained twice a year in psychological first aid and the identification of early warning signs of distress. Special sensitivity training is mandatory for those interacting with students from marginalized communities including SC, ST, OBC, EWS, LGBTQ+ groups, and individuals with disabilities or trauma histories.
Residential institutions must implement preventive safety measures, including tamper-proof ceiling fans and restricted access to rooftops and balconies, to deter impulsive self-harm. Confidential systems for reporting incidents of sexual assault, ragging, and discrimination based on caste, gender, religion, or sexual orientation must be established in all institutions, along with mechanisms for immediate psychosocial support.
The Court emphasized the need for holistic student development by urging institutions to lessen exam-related pressure, broaden the definition of academic success, promote extracurricular activities, and provide interest-based career counseling for both students and their parents. These measures are intended to shift the focus from academic results to overall well-being and personal growth.
In terms of regulation, the Court instructed all States and Union Territories to draft specific rules within two months for monitoring and controlling private coaching centres. The Central Government has been directed to file a compliance affidavit within 90 days detailing the actions taken, coordination with state authorities, and updates from the National Task Force on student mental health.
Particular attention has been directed toward high-pressure academic zones such as Kota, Jaipur, Sikar, Chennai, Hyderabad, Delhi, and Mumbai, which are known for their intense coaching environments. These regions are to be prioritized for implementing mental health interventions and constructing preventive infrastructure to protect students at risk.
Through this verdict, the Supreme Court has transformed what has long been an unaddressed social issue into a matter of urgent national policy. By legally mandating mental health reforms across India’s educational landscape, the judiciary has signaled a shift from reactive to preventive care for the country’s youth, ensuring that no student is left without emotional support in their most vulnerable moments.
