Ending Ragging: NHRC Demands Accountability and Safer Campuses

Ragging in Medical Colleges Tops 38%: NHRC Demands Stronger Action.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) convened an Open House Discussion on “Re-examining Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions: Creating Safer Campuses through Awareness, Accountability, and Action” at Manav Adhikar Bhavan, New Delhi. The meeting was chaired by Justice V. Ramasubramanian, Hon’ble Chairperson, NHRC, and attended by Dr. Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi and Smt. Vijaya Bharathi Sayani, Members of NHRC, alongside senior officials, ministry representatives, academics, and civil society organizations.

Background and Key Concerns

The agenda focused on addressing the continuing problem of ragging in higher educational institutions, with reference to the recent Kottayam case. NHRC highlighted that medical institutions account for 38.6% of reported ragging incidents, identifying them as critical areas of concern. Despite existing guidelines—including the 2001 directives, the R. K. Raghavan Committee recommendations, and the 2009 UGC Regulations—participants noted that weak enforcement, under-reporting, fear of reprisal, and cultural normalization of ragging persist.

Highlights of the Discussion

Institutional and Legal Framework

Justice V. Ramasubramanian, NHRC Chairperson, emphasized the gap between abundant laws and their inadequate enforcement. He called for strict anonymity for complainants, stronger monitoring, and a victim-centric approach.

Dr. Justice B. R. Sarangi urged participants to identify root causes and suggest concrete preventive measures.

Smt. Vijaya Bharathi Sayani pointed out the prevalence of caste-based ragging and stressed inclusive interventions.

Ministry and Regulatory Perspectives

Rina Sonowal Kouli, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Education, spoke on the ongoing review of anti-ragging guidelines and the National Task Force on Student Mental Health and Suicide Prevention.

Prof. Manish R. Joshi, Secretary, UGC, detailed the 2009 anti-ragging policy and suggested joint awareness campaigns in Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities, psychosocial support systems, and real-time grievance dashboards.

Dr. N. H. Siddalinga Swamy, Advisor, AICTE, emphasized strict punitive measures including withdrawal of institutional approval for non-compliance.

Dr. Arvind Kumar Drave, Consultant, NMC, recommended separating freshers and seniors in hostels, CCTV monitoring, and wellness centres.

Perspectives from Academia and Civil Society

Prof. Manas K. Mandal (IIT Kharagpur) highlighted the role of cultural hierarchies and recommended behavioral change through “nudging strategies.”Prof. Sampa Saha (IIT Delhi) raised concerns about cyber-bullying as a new form of ragging.

Prof. Rajendar Kachroo (Aman Movement) described ragging as a human rights violation and linked it to student suicides, urging systemic prevention and recognition of institutional negligence.

Alka Tomar (Centre for Youth) and Gaurav Singhal (SAVE) stressed the accountability of higher education institutions, parental involvement, and effective grievance redressal mechanisms.

Meera Kaura Patel (SAVE) called for a National Anti-Ragging Act to make offences cognizable nationwide, along with institutional compliance reporting.

Bharat Parashar (NALSA) advocated mandatory reporting of complaints, police sensitization, and independent monitoring mechanisms.

Medical and Mental Health Perspectives

Dr. Rakesh Lodha (AIIMS, New Delhi) emphasized prevention through awareness, induction programs, and mental health services, highlighting the cycle of victims turning perpetrators.

Dr. Gururaj G. Pamidi (IIM Indore) proposed establishing Centres for Wellness and Inclusion, strong mentor-mentee programs, and transparent grievance redressal systems.

Dr. Meet Ghonia (FORDA) underscored the gap between laws and ground-level enforcement, urging a comprehensive national policy and zero tolerance in practice, not just on paper.

Recommendations and Way Forward

• Strengthening institutional accountability and legal enforcement.
• Expanding mental health and counseling services.
• Ensuring anonymous complaint mechanisms and victim protection.
• Establishing joint campaigns and awareness drives, especially beyond metropolitan cities.
• Recognizing ragging as both a disciplinary and human rights issue.

In his concluding remarks, Justice V. Ramasubramanian called for actionable submissions from stakeholders, categorizing them into areas under NHRC’s mandate and those requiring inter-agency coordination. He also proposed that all cases of suicide or murder linked to ragging be reported to NHRC.

Conclusion

The Open House reaffirmed that ragging remains a serious human rights challenge in higher education. Despite comprehensive legal frameworks, weak implementation continues to endanger students’ safety and mental health. The NHRC emphasized shifting from an accused-centric to a victim-centric approach, underscoring the urgent need for awareness, accountability, and action to make Indian campuses safer.

The Medical Bulletin