The Architecture Of Distress: Reconceptualising Student Mental Health In Indian Legal Education As A Constitutional Imperative
- IJLLR Journal
- 7 minutes ago
- 2 min read
Kanishk Dohare, National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Chirag Saxena, National Law Institute University, Bhopal
ABSTRACT
The mental well-being of students in Indian higher education has historically been relegated to the periphery of institutional policy, framed as a matter of administrative discretion rather than a legally enforceable constitutional right. Within the specific context of legal education, this regulatory ambivalence has fostered an environment where academic rigor frequently devolves into systemic psychological distress. This paper examines the structural architecture of the mental health crisis among Indian law students, arguing that the crisis is not an incidental byproduct of professional training, but a structurally produced condition exacerbated by hyper-competitive pedagogies, rigid regulatory mandates concerning attendance, and entrenched socio-economic marginalisation within elite institutions. Recent jurisprudential developments, notably the Supreme Court of India’s landmark pronouncements in Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Amit Kumar v. Union of India, have fundamentally altered this landscape by elevating student mental health to a non-negotiable constitutional imperative under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. By shifting the paradigm from institutional welfare to tortious liability and positive state obligation, the judiciary has exposed the glaring inadequacies of existing regulatory frameworks governing legal education. The Bar Council of India’s rules meticulously dictate attendance thresholds and curriculum structures yet remain entirely silent on mental health infrastructure. Simultaneously, empirical evidence from longitudinal diversity surveys highlights a compounding crisis of alienation, particularly among marginalised demographics navigating these spaces. This paper synthesises constitutional law, statutory frameworks under the Mental Health Care Act, 2017, and empirical survey data to propose a normatively grounded, practically feasible framework for reform. It concludes that legal educational institutions cannot credibly instruct students in the constitutional promises of dignity and justice while maintaining pedagogical environments that systematically undermine the psychological survival of the student body.
