Safiya Malik

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit of the Rajasthan High Court has deferred interim directions in a matter concerning student suicides in coaching institutes, noting that the Supreme Court has taken cognizance of the issue. In view of the apex court’s pending consideration; the Bench directed that the matter be listed after two weeks. Although inclined to issue directions for implementing Central Government guidelines aimed at addressing student mental health, the High Court chose to temporarily withhold such orders, especially given the respondents’ stated intention to seek a transfer of the case to the Supreme Court.

The Court recorded that 14 student suicides have occurred in Kota in 2025 alone, describing the situation as one of "serious concern." The matter is scheduled for hearing before the Supreme Court on 23 May 2025, and the High Court emphasized that judicial restraint was warranted in light of these developments.

Also Read: "Corruption Corrodes the Spine of a Nation": Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Under Prevention of Corruption Act; Alters Sentence Considering Age, Anxiety, and Extended Pendency

The writ petition, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 99/2016, was initiated suo moto by the Rajasthan High Court in response to the rising number of student suicides, particularly in the coaching hub of Kota. It was later tagged with D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19602/2022, filed by Dr. Triloki Nath Sharma. The litigation responds to a disturbing pattern of suicides among students attending competitive exam coaching centres in Rajasthan.

The Court was informed that the Central Government had issued guidelines to improve student mental health and prevent suicides, and that a related Bill had been referred to a select committee. Nonetheless, the petitioner and the Amicus Curiae highlighted continued suicides even in the current year and urged for interim enforcement of these guidelines pending legislation.

Affidavits filed by the Amicus Curiae and the Advocate General included data on student deaths and reiterated the urgency of intervention. The submissions argued that immediate measures were necessary to prevent further loss of young lives.

However, opposition came from respondent No.13, a coaching institute, whose counsel, Mr. Mukul Rohtagi and Mr. Paras Kuhad, submitted that a similar matter was already under consideration before the Supreme Court. They expressed the intent to apply for a transfer of the present PIL to the apex court to facilitate an analogous hearing. On grounds of judicial propriety and to avoid parallel proceedings, they prayed that the High Court should refrain from proceeding further.

Taking note of these submissions and the pendency of related proceedings before the Supreme Court, the High Court observed that no specific legislation had been enacted on the issue despite the petition being pending since 2016. While the Court was prepared to issue interim directions, it ultimately opted to hold its hand temporarily in light of the evolving situation at the apex court.

Also Read: Patna High Court Acquits Juvenile, Labels Conviction A Travesty Of Justice | Cites Highly Doubtful Evidence And Violation Of The Best Interest Of The Child Principle

The Bench remarked that the issue remains deeply concerning, with Kota witnessing continuing student suicides year after year. The Court referred to the affidavits on record and acknowledged its own past efforts through multiple interim orders. It also noted the Central Government’s steps, including the issuance of guidelines and initiation of legislative measures, and recognized the urgent need for action.

The Amicus Curiae urged that guidelines be enforced until legislation is enacted, but in light of the respondents’ submissions and upcoming Supreme Court proceedings, the High Court decided against immediate intervention.

Summarizing its position, the Court stated it was inclined to implement the Central Government guidelines through a detailed order but refrained from doing so, acknowledging the Supreme Court’s ongoing consideration of the matter. Accordingly, it ordered that the case be listed after two weeks.

Advocates Representing the Parties:

For the Petitioners: Mr. Sudhir Gupta, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae) assisted by Ms. Shweta Chauhan;

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate General assisted by Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma, Ms. Dhriti Laddha & Mr. Tanay Goyal; Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ASG assisted by Mr. Devesh Yadav & Mr. Yatharth Asopa; Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Senior Advocate through VC and Mr. Paras Kuhad, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sanjeevi Seshadri, Mr. Akshay Agarwal, Mr. Manish Sharma & Mr. Prakash Jha; Mr. Sajid Ali, Mr. Vishwas Saini on behalf of Mr. M.S. Raghav; Ms. Sakshi Agarwal

Case Title: Suo Moto v. State of Rajasthan

Case Number: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 99/2016 and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19602/2022

Bench: Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit

[Read/Download order]