Justice Vikram Nath says ragging undermines dignity at IIT Delhi event on National Youth Day

The Menace of Ragging: Justice Vikram Nath Reaffirms Dignity at IIT Delhi

The corridors of India’s premier educational institutions have long been celebrated as the birthplaces of innovation and leadership. However, there exists a shadow that often darkens these halls of learning—the persistent issue of ragging. On the occasion of National Youth Day, Justice Vikram Nath, a distinguished judge of the Supreme Court of India and the Executive Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), delivered a poignant address at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi. His message was clear and resonant: ragging is not a rite of passage, nor is it a harmless tradition; it is a profound misuse of power that fundamentally undermines human dignity.

As a Senior Advocate observing the evolution of our legal system, I find Justice Nath’s remarks particularly timely. National Youth Day, celebrated on the birth anniversary of Swami Vivekananda, is intended to inspire the youth toward character building and nation-building. By choosing this platform to address ragging, Justice Nath has linked the concept of student discipline directly to the constitutional values of dignity and fraternity. His observation that ragging causes deep-seated fear and embarrassment highlights the psychological trauma that can derail a student’s academic journey before it even truly begins.

National Youth Day: A Platform for Redefining Student Culture

The choice of IIT Delhi as the venue for this discourse is significant. Our Indian Institutes of Technology represent the pinnacle of academic merit. Yet, even these elite spaces are not immune to the social hierarchies and power dynamics that fuel ragging. Justice Nath’s presence as the NALSA Executive Chairman underscores the legal system’s commitment to protecting the vulnerable within the student community. National Youth Day serves as a reminder that the youth are the “architects of the future,” but as Justice Nath suggested, these architects cannot build a robust society if their own foundation is laid on the shifting sands of intimidation and dominance.

The core of Justice Nath’s message focused on the transition from a culture of fear to a culture of confidence. In the legal world, we often see the aftermath of ragging—cases that reach the courts only after irreparable damage has been done. By addressing students directly, Justice Nath is advocating for a preventive approach, one where the senior students realize that true leadership is defined by mentorship, not by the capacity to humiliate others.

Deconstructing Ragging: A Misuse of Power and an Affront to Dignity

Justice Vikram Nath’s characterization of ragging as a “misuse of power” strikes at the heart of the legal and social problem. In many instances, ragging is justified by perpetrators as a method of “breaking the ice” or “toughening up” newcomers. However, from a legal perspective, any act that violates the autonomy and dignity of an individual cannot be excused under the guise of tradition. The Supreme Court of India has, in various landmark judgments, defined ragging as an act that causes or is likely to cause physical or psychological harm or to raise apprehension, fear, or shame in a student.

Justice Nath observed that ragging creates an environment of fear and embarrassment. This fear is not just a momentary emotion; it often manifests as chronic anxiety, loss of self-esteem, and in tragic cases, has led to self-harm or suicide. When a senior student uses their position to intimidate a junior, they are not demonstrating strength. Rather, they are demonstrating a lack of character. Justice Nath emphasized that true strength lies in making others feel safe and confident. This aligns with the constitutional mandate under Article 21, which guarantees the right to live with dignity. Dignity is not a luxury; it is a fundamental necessity for any individual to flourish in an educational environment.

The Psychological Toll and the Cycle of Dominance

One of the most insidious aspects of ragging is the cycle it creates. Those who are ragged often feel a misplaced sense of “right” to rag their juniors in the following year, viewing it as a compensatory mechanism for their own suffering. Justice Nath’s speech aimed to break this cycle. By highlighting that mentorship and guidance leave a “far deeper impression” than intimidation, he appealed to the intellectual and moral sensibilities of the IIT students.

Mentorship fosters a sense of inclusion. When a first-year student enters a high-pressure environment like an IIT, they are often overwhelmed. A senior who offers guidance becomes a lifelong ally and a role model. Conversely, a senior who rags becomes a source of trauma. The legal system recognizes that the psychological scars of ragging can last much longer than physical injuries. Justice Nath’s focus on “inclusion” suggests that our educational institutions must strive to be communities of scholars, not hierarchies of tormentors.

The Legal Framework: From Guidelines to Criminal Liability

As we analyze Justice Nath’s remarks, it is essential to revisit the legal framework that governs ragging in India. The shift from treating ragging as a disciplinary issue to a criminal offense has been driven largely by the judiciary. The landmark case of Vishwa Jagriti Mission vs. Central Government (2001) laid the groundwork for anti-ragging measures, but it was the R.K. Raghavan Committee, appointed by the Supreme Court, that provided the most comprehensive roadmap for eradication.

Under the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations on Curbing the Menace of Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions, 2009, ragging is strictly prohibited. These regulations mandate that every institution must have an Anti-Ragging Committee and an Anti-Ragging Squad. Furthermore, the Indian Penal Code (now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) can be invoked depending on the nature of the act—ranging from criminal intimidation and hurt to wrongful restraint and even abetment to suicide. Justice Nath, in his capacity as a senior member of the judiciary, understands that while laws are necessary, the enforcement of these laws depends on a cultural shift within the institutions themselves.

The Role of NALSA and Access to Justice

Justice Vikram Nath’s role as the Executive Chairman of NALSA brings a unique perspective to the anti-ragging discourse. NALSA is tasked with providing free legal services to the weaker sections of society and ensuring that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen. In the context of ragging, “weaker sections” can include students who are marginalized by their socio-economic background, language, or simply their status as newcomers.

Legal aid clinics in educational institutions are a vital tool in this fight. If a student feels threatened, they should have immediate access to legal recourse without fear of further victimization or institutional backlash. Justice Nath’s emphasis on making others feel “safe” is a call to action for legal aid cells to be more proactive. It is not enough to have a policy on paper; there must be a visible and accessible support system that empowers victims to speak up.

Shifting the Paradigm: From Dominance to Mentorship

The most profound takeaway from Justice Nath’s address at IIT Delhi is the distinction between dominance and mentorship. In a competitive academic environment, there is often a misconception that dominance is synonymous with leadership. However, as Justice Nath pointed out, true leadership is about lifting others up. A senior student who guides a junior through the complexities of a difficult course or helps them navigate the social life of the campus is exercising true strength.

This shift requires a fundamental change in the “senior-junior” dynamic. Institutions must actively promote mentorship programs where seniors are incentivized to take responsibility for the well-being of their juniors. When mentorship becomes the norm, the “need” to rag disappears. Inclusion becomes the culture, and the “misuse of power” is replaced by the “empowerment of others.”

The Responsibility of Educational Institutions

While the law provides the stick, the carrot must come from the institutional culture. Institutions like IIT Delhi have a heightened responsibility to set an example for the rest of the country. Justice Nath’s observation that mentorship leaves a deeper impression is a directive to faculty and administration. They must not turn a blind eye to “minor” incidents of ragging, as these often escalate into major tragedies. A zero-tolerance policy must be implemented not just in letter, but in spirit.

The administration must foster an environment where students feel comfortable reporting incidents. Often, the fear of being labeled a “snitch” or facing social ostracization prevents victims from coming forward. Institutions must work to dismantle these toxic social codes. By celebrating National Youth Day with a focus on dignity, IIT Delhi and Justice Nath have sent a message that the institution values the character of its students as much as their academic prowess.

Conclusion: The Path Forward for Indian Youth

The words of Justice Vikram Nath serve as a moral compass for the youth of India. Ragging is an archaic practice that has no place in a modern, democratic society that prides itself on the rule of law and the protection of human rights. It is a violation of the “fraternity” promised in the Preamble of our Constitution—a fraternity that is meant to assure the dignity of the individual and the unity of the nation.

As a legal professional, I believe that the eradication of ragging requires a three-pronged approach: rigorous legal enforcement, institutional accountability, and a radical shift in student mindset. Justice Nath has addressed the third, and perhaps most difficult, aspect of this triad. By appealing to the “true strength” of the students, he has challenged them to redefine what it means to be a senior and a leader.

On this National Youth Day, let the message from the IIT Delhi event resonate across all campuses in India. Let us move away from the darkness of intimidation and toward the light of mentorship. Only when every student feels safe, confident, and respected can our educational institutions truly fulfill their promise of excellence. Justice Vikram Nath’s reminder is clear: dignity is non-negotiable, and the power of the youth should be used to build, not to break.

In the final analysis, the fight against ragging is not just about following rules; it is about recognizing the humanity in one another. When we uphold the dignity of a fellow student, we uphold the dignity of the entire legal and social fabric of India. It is time for the youth to lead this change, ensuring that the only “impression” left on their juniors is one of support, guidance, and lasting friendship.