CHENNAI: In his seminal book, Education and the Significance of Life, spiritual speaker, seeker and writer Jiddu Krishnamurti says the function of education is to create human beings who are integrated and therefore intelligent. "The mind of a child must not be conditioned by fear, competition, or compulsion." The true success of education lies not in grades or rankings but in the holistic growth of a human being capable of living with dignity, confidence, and purpose.
In contrast to these ideals, the current academic framework, particularly competitive examination systems, often subject students to relentless psychological pressure. The very soul of education appears to have been distorted. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data for 2022 reveals a distressing reality — of the 1,70,924 suicides recorded in India that year, 13,044 were students, with 2,248 linked to failures in examinations.
It is in this context that the Supreme Court on July 25 delivered a pivotal ruling in Sukdeb Saha vs State of Andhra Pradesh and others, addressing the escalating crisis of student suicides in India. While adjudicating on a specific case of a 17-year-old student’s ‘death by suicide’ in Visakhapatnam, the court issued comprehensive interim guidelines to safeguard mental health of students across all educational institutions.
A bench of justices Vikram nath and Sandeep Mehta said there remained a "legislative and regulatory vacuum" in the country with respect to a unified, enforceable framework for suicide prevention of students in educational institutions, coaching centres, and student-centric environments.
It said the continued loss of young lives, often due to preventable causes rooted in unattended psychological distress, academic overburden, social stigma, and institutional insensitivity, reflect a systemic failure that cannot be ignored. While framing the guidelines, the bench noted that the measures should remain in force and are binding, until such time as appropriate legislation or regulatory frameworks were enacted by the competent authority.
The court’s intervention, grounded in the constitutional right to life under Article 21, came on a writ petition filed by the father of the deceased girl student after his plea for a CBI probe was rejected by the Andhra Pradesh high court. The FIR was registered following the tragic, unnatural death of the appellant’s 17-year-old daughter, who was undergoing coaching for the NEET examination at Aakash Byju’s Institute in Visakhapatnam. She was staying in a hostel when the unfortunate incident occurred on July 14, 2023, leading to her untimely death. Her death under suspicious circumstances exposed lapses in institutional accountability, police investigation, and medical care.
The case underscores broader systemic issues, including the lack of mental health support, apart from exposing the toll of an education system that prioritises performance metrics over emotional well-being, particularly in coaching hubs like Kota, Jaipur, Hyderabad, Chennai and Visakhapatnam, where students migrate in large numbers to prepare for competitive exams.
Pressure of competitive exams
India’s education system, particularly its competitive examination framework, has long been associated with intense psychological pressure on students. The court said education has now been reduced to a “high-stakes race”, where students face relentless performance metrics, societal expectations, and institutional rigidity, often at the cost of their mental well-being.
The 2022 NCRB data of 13,044 student suicides marks a significant rise from 5,425 student suicides in 2001, with a 99% increase in male student suicides and a 92% increase in female suicides over the past decade. Alarmingly, 2,248 of these deaths were directly attributed to examination failures. "In this paradigm, life becomes a series of tests, and failure is seen not as a part of growth but as a devastating end," said the bench.
A catalyst for broader reforms
The court quashed the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s order and transferred the investigation of the student's death to the CBI. The court found compelling evidence of investigative failures, hasty probe by police, discrepancies in CCTV footage of the hostel building from where the girl fell off, medical negligence, forensic lapses, and conflict of interest. The same medical officer served as autopsy surgeon, chemical analyst, and inquiry committee member, compromising objectivity.
The plea of the girl's father had argued that the authorities' failure to properly evaluate forensic samples from the deceased's body and their classification of the suspicious death as suicide was illegal, arbitrary, and totally unjustified. The high court in February 2024 disposed of his petition by stating that since there are two FIR registered in two different states — Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal (where the appellant is based) — the prayer seeking transfer of the case to CBI was beyond the jurisdiction of the high court. But the Supreme Court said these lapses justified transferring the investigation to the CBI to ensure impartiality and restore public confidence. The court emphasised that such transfers are exceptional but are warranted in cases of clear investigative failures.
Addressing an epidemic
The court then went proactive, issuing 15 interim guidelines under Articles 32 (enforcement of fundamental rights) and 141 (treating the court's pronouncement as law) of the Constitution to address the “suicide epidemic.” The bench recalled how the judgment in the Vishaka versus State of Rajasthan addressed the legislative vacuum on sexual harassment in the workplace under Article 141, and is now "celebrated" as the 'Vishaka Guidelines'.
Implementation and accountability
The court directed all states and Union Territories to notify rules within two months for registering private coaching centres and enforcing these guidelines. District-level monitoring committees, chaired by District Magistrates, have been tasked to oversee compliance and handle complaints. The Union government must file a compliance affidavit within 90 days, detailing implementation steps and the status of the national Task Force on Mental Health, established earlier in Amit Kumar versus Union of India, 2025. This task force, led by Justice (Retd.) Ravindra Bhat, is working on formulating a comprehensive framework, and the court’s latest guidelines are designed to complement its ongoing work.
Implications and challenges
The Supreme Court’s order is a landmark step toward prioritising student mental health, recognising it as an integral part of the right to life under Article 21. By invoking international obligations, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the WHO’s Mental Health Action Plan, the court's order helps align India’s approach to student suicides with global standards.
The guidelines address both immediate needs (e.g., helplines, safety measures) and systemic issues (e.g., inclusivity, parental sensitisation), offering a holistic framework. However, implementation of these guidelines pose several challenges.
India’s education sector is vast and diverse. Smaller schools and coaching centres may struggle to appoint qualified counsellors or fund training programmes. The lack of trained mental health professionals — India has only 0.3 psychiatrists per 1,00,000 people, as per WHO estimates — could hinder compliance.
Additionally, cultural stigma around mental health may deter students and parents from seeking help. The success of these guidelines will depend on robust enforcement, adequate funding, and public awareness campaigns.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s speaking order has turned over a new leaf in addressing India’s student suicide crisis. By linking an individual tragedy to systemic failures, the court has issued a clarion call for reform. The guidelines, rooted in constitutional and international mandates, aim to transform educational institutions into safe, supportive spaces. While the national Task Force’s final recommendations are awaited, these interim measures provide a critical safety net.
As India grapples with the loss of over 13,000 student lives annually, the judgment underscores a simple truth: education should nurture, not destroy, young minds. The onus now lies on governments, institutions, and society to translate these directives into meaningful action, ensuring no more lives are lost to despair
Filling regulatory vacuum on suicide prevention
All educational institutions shall adopt and implement a uniform mental health policy, drawing cues from the UMMEED Draft Guidelines, the MANODARPAN initiative, and the National Suicide Prevention Strategy. This policy shall be reviewed and updated annually and made publicly accessible on institutional websites and notice boards of the institutes.
All educational institutions with 100 or more enrolled students shall appoint/engage at least one qualified counsellor, psychologist, or social worker with demonstrable training in child and adolescent mental health. Institutions with fewer students shall establish formal referral linkages with external mental health professionals.
All educational institutions shall ensure optimal student-tocounsellor ratios. Dedicated mentors or counsellors shall be assigned to smaller batches of students, especially during examination periods and academic transitions, to provide consistent, informal, and confidential support.
All educational institutions, more particularly the coaching institutes/centres, shall, as far as possible, refrain from engaging in batch segregation based on academic performance, public shaming, or assignment of academic targets disproportionate to students’ capacities.
All educational institutions shall establish written protocols for immediate referral to mental health services, local hospitals, and suicide prevention helplines. Suicide helpline numbers, including TeleMANAS and other national services, shall be prominently displayed in hostels, classrooms, common areas, and on websites in large and legible print.
All teaching and nonteaching staff shall undergo mandatory training at least twice a year, conducted by certified mental health professionals, on psychological first-aid, identification of warning signs, response to selfharm, and referral mechanisms.
All educational institutions shall ensure that all teaching, nonteaching, and administrative staff are adequately trained to engage with students from vulnerable and marginalised backgrounds in a sensitive, inclusive, and nondiscriminatory manner. This shall include, but not be limited to, students belonging to Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), LGBTQ+ communities, students with disabilities, those in out-of-home care, and students affected by bereavement, trauma, or prior suicide attempts, or intersecting form of marginalisation.
All educational institutions shall establish robust, confidential, and accessible mechanisms for the reporting, redressal, and prevention of incidents involving sexual assault, harassment, ragging, and bullying on the basis of caste, class, gender, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or ethnicity. Every such institution shall constitute an internal committee or designated authority empowered to take immediate action on complaints and provide psychosocial support to victims. Institutions shall also maintain zero tolerance for retaliatory actions against complainants or whistle-blowers. In all such cases, immediate referral to trained mental health professionals must be ensured, and the student’s safety, physical and psychological, shall be prioritised. Failure to take timely or adequate action in such cases, especially where such neglect contributes to a student’s self-harm or suicide, shall be treated as institutional culpability, making the administration liable to regulatory and legal consequences.
All educational Institutions shall regularly organise sensitisation programmes (physical and/or online) for parents and guardians on student mental health. It shall be the duty of the institution to sensitise the parents and guardians to avoid placing undue academic pressure, to recognise signs of psychological distress, and to respond empathetically and supportively. Further, mental health literacy, emotional regulation, life skills education, and awareness of institutional support services shall be integrated into student orientation programmes and co-curricular activities.
All educational institutions shall maintain anonymised records and prepare an annual report indicating the number of wellness interventions, student referrals, training sessions, and mental healthrelated activities. This report shall be submitted to the relevant regulatory authority, which may be the State Education Department, University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), or as otherwise indicated.
All educational institutions shall prioritise extracurricular activities, including sports, arts, and personality development initiatives. Examination patterns shall be periodically reviewed to reduce academic burden and to cultivate a broader sense of identity among students beyond test scores and ranks.
All educational institutions, including coaching centres and training institutes, shall provide regular, structured career counselling services for students and their parents or guardians. These sessions shall be conducted by qualified counsellors and shall aim to reduce unrealistic academic pressure, promote awareness of diverse academic and professional pathways, and assist students in making informed and interest-based career decisions. Institutions shall ensure that such counselling is inclusive, sensitive to socio-economic and psychological contexts, and does not reinforce narrow definitions of merit or success.
All residentialbased educational institutions, including hostel owners, wardens and caretakers, shall take proactive steps to ensure that campuses remain free from harassment, bullying, drugs, and other harmful substances, thereby ensuring a safe and healthy living and learning environment for all students.
All residentialbased institutions shall install tamperproof ceiling fans or equivalent safety devices, and shall restrict access to rooftops, balconies, and other high-risk areas, in order to deter impulsive acts of self-harm.
All coaching hubs, including but not limited to Jaipur, Kota, Sikar, Chennai, Hyderabad, Delhi, Mumbai, and other cities where students migrate in large numbers for competitive examination preparation, shall implement heightened mental health protections and preventive measures. These regions, having witnessed disproportionately high incidents of student suicides, require special attention. The concerned authorities, namely, the Department of Education, District Administration, and management of educational institutions, shall ensure the provision of regular career counselling for students and parents, regulation of academic pressure through structured academic planning, availability of continuous psychological support, and the establishment of institutional mechanisms for monitoring and accountability to safeguard student mental well-being.