The Delhi High Court has stressed the critical need for a functional and effective Anti-Ragging Helpline to address the growing issue of student suicides linked to ragging in higher educational institutions, reported Livelaw
A division bench, comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, emphasised that delays in implementing such measures are unacceptable, stating, “This can brook no delay lest we lose more young lives to this scourge.”
The court expressed deep concern over the increasing frequency of student suicides, echoing concerns previously raised by the Supreme Court in Amit Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India.
Background of the National Ragging Prevention programme
The issue arose during the hearing of two petitions filed by the Aman Satya Kachroo Trust, which sought reforms in the management of the National Ragging Prevention Programme, reported Livelaw
Initiated in 2009 by Prof Rajendra Kachroo, the program included a 24x7 nationwide anti-ragging helpline, a database of student and parent details collected via online affidavits, a database of Anti-Ragging Committees across nearly 50,000 colleges, and a compliance and monitoring mechanism.
Following a Supreme Court directive, the program was to be managed by a non-governmental agency, leading to the University Grants Commission (UGC) framing the “UGC Regulations on Curbing the Menace of Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions, 2009.”
Legal challenges and tender disputes
The Aman Satya Kachroo Trust challenged the UGC’s decision to award a contract to the Centre for Youth Society (C4Y) in December 2021 for managing the Anti-Ragging Programme, following the discontinuation of the Trust’s role in April 2022.
The Trust sought cancellation of the tender and a related UGC notice, arguing that a subsequent tender issued in June 2024 was an extension of the 2021 tender and could undermine their legal challenge.
The court, however, declined to interfere with the ongoing contract with C4Y, which is set to expire on December 31, 2025, noting that the matter was under active consideration by the Supreme Court.
Court’s observations and recommendations
The court acknowledged the Trust’s concerns about the “ham-handed” and “lackadaisical” approach of the UGC and C4Y, particularly in light of rising student suicide cases.
