1. Writ petition against Delhi High Court rejection of mandamus directing Police to register FIR in connection with suicides of two students alleging caste-based discrimination. (Para 1 , 2 , 9 )
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN, JJ.
Amit Kumar & Ors – Appellants
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1425 of 2025 (@SLP (CRL) NO. 13324 OF 2024)
Decided on : 24-03-2025
1. Writ petition against Delhi High Court rejection of mandamus directing Police to register FIR in connection with suicides of two students alleging caste-based discrimination. (Para 1 , 2 , 9 )
2. Whether Police should have registered FIR under Section 154 CrPC for cognizable offence disclosed in complaints or merely conducted inquest under Section 174; whether mandamus lies to direct such registration. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 )
3. Leave granted; National Task Force constituted to prepare comprehensive report and recommend measures to prevent student suicides in Higher Educational Institutions through coordinated governmental action. (Para 1 , 69 , 74 , 79 )
When cognizable offence is disclosed through complaints filed with the Police by family members, the duty is on the Police to register the FIR and carry out investigation under the CrPC, rather than merely conducting an inquest under Section 174 and closing the matter without registration. (Para 8 , 9 )
Yes. When a student joins a university campus, the institution assumes the role of parent and has a duty of care extending beyond academic excellence to include ensuring mental well-being and providing support in times of distress. (Para 66 )
The Court identified academic pressure, caste-based discrimination, financial stress, sexual harassment, and ragging as key contributing factors, alongside exam failures and rigid score-based evaluation systems that compound student distress. (Para 57 , 63 , 64 )
Yes. The Court has constituted a National Task Force commencing with the Joint Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education as convener, with a mandate to prepare a comprehensive report and recommend measures. All Central and State authorities and universities are directed to cooperate and furnish necessary data and information. (Para 69 , 72 , 79 )
JUDGMENT :
J. B. PARDIWALA & R. MAHADEVAN, JJ.
For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts:
I
| INDEX |
| A. FACTUAL MATRIX |
| B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS |
| C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT NOS. 2, 3, 4 AND 7 RESPECTIVELY |
| D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 5 – IIT DELHI |
| E. ANALYSIS |
| i. Scope of Section 174 of the CrPC |
| ii. F.I.R. under Section 154 of the CrPC |
| F. CONCLUSION |
| G. NATIONAL TASK FORCE TO ADDRESS THE MENTAL HEALTH CONCERNS OF STUDENTS AND PREVENT THE COMMISSION OF SUICIDES IN HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS |
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi, dated 30.01.2024, in Writ Petition Criminal No. 2945 of 2023 by which the High Court rejected the writ application filed by the appellants herein declining to issue a writ of mandamus to the Police for the purpose of registration of a First Information Report (for short, “F.I.R.”) in connection with the commission of suicide by two students - sons of the appellant no. 2 and appellant no. 3 herein respectively - while they were studying at the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi (for short, “IIT, Delhi”).
A. FACTUAL MATRIX
3. We propose to borrow the facts giving rise to this appeal straight from the impugned judgment of the High Court. The same reads thus:
“1. The present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:-
"a) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the police authorities or Respondent No. 6 to register appropriate FIRs in the cases involving the deaths of the sons of Petitioner No. 2 and Petitioner No. 3; and
b) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the investigation of the cases to be done by Respondent No. 6; and
c) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the Respondent No. 6 to conduct a thorough, impartial investigation into the caste based atrocities being committed in the premises of Respondent No. 5; and
d) monitor the investigation of the case; and
e) direct an independent inquiry into caste based atrocities being committed in the premises of Respondent No. 5; and
f) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby commanding the Respondents to ensure strict compliance and implementation of provisions of SC/ST(POA)Act,1989 and rules and regulations under the SC/ST(POA) Rules 1995.
g) pass any other or further orders, as this Hon'b1e Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the present case."
2. In brief the facts of the case are that Complaints dated 26.07.2023 and 09.09.2023 were filed by the petitioners who are the parents of two deceased students of B.Tech (Mathematics and Computing) at Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, wherein, it was alleged that one student, namely, Ayush Ashna was found dead on 08.07.2023 at his Hostel Room No. WH-02, Seventh Floor, Udaigiri Hostel, IIT, New Delhi and another student, namely, Anil Kumar was found dead on 01.09.2023 in his Hostel Room No. EA-18, Ground Floor, Vidhyachal Hostel, IIT, New Delhi. It is alleged in the complaints that they were murdered with the conspiracy of IIT Faculty members to hide the real facts and both the students have been falsely shown to have committed suicide. It is further alleged in the complaints that both the students belonged to Scheduled Castes and they had informed their parents several times regarding caste discrimination by the faculty/staff of IIT, Delhi and therefore, the petitioners alleged that the faculty members are trying to save the real accused persons and the police officials are also not investigating the matter in a proper manner. In vi
Ashok Kumar Todi v. Kishwar Jahan
Manoj Kumar Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh
Pedda Narayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Sheikh Hasib Alias Tabarak v. State of Bihar
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P.
National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights v. Union of India
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.