Activists and experts hail Supreme Court focus on mental health

Time of India

3 days ago

Kolkata: Mental health activists and experts have welcomed the Supreme Court's explicit recognition of mental health as an integral part of the constitutional Right to Life under Article 21.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
They say this broadens the interpretation of the right to life to include psychological well-being, not just physical survival. The SC recognised the right to mental health as an integral component of the right to life under Article 21 while laying down binding guidelines for educational institutions and coaching centres across India.
The observation was made in a case related to the death of a 17-year-old student undergoing coaching for the NEET examination.
The apex court set aside orders of the Andhra Pradesh HC to allow transfer of the investigation into the death under suspicious circumstances to CBI.
Mental health activist Ratnaboli Ray, who is the founder of Anjali, a rights-based organisation, said the order moves mental health from the realm of welfare or charity into the domain of legal and constitutional rights. "This means that the state and institutions are no longer simply encouraged but obligated to ensure mental health protections as part of their duty under the Constitution," said Ray, a psychologist by training.
Ray also pointed out that by issuing guidelines for students' welfare in the context of mental health, the court has acknowledged the growing mental health crisis in educational spaces — ranging from anxiety and depression to suicide. This makes schools and universities potentially accountable for creating psychologically safe environments.
Advocate Arush Sengupta said embedding mental health under Article 21 makes it justiciable.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
"If someone's right to mental well-being is violated, they can now take legal recourse based on constitutional grounds. This also strengthens the implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, which already defines access to mental health services as a right, but until now lacked the direct constitutional force to ensure consistent and widespread enforcement," he said.
Psychiatrist Aniruddha Deb felt the ruling has the potential to transform institutional accountability, public funding, and societal attitudes in India.
"This is a landmark judgment. Till now, mental illness was perceived as a disability, a dysfunction and looked down upon. People with mental illness were relegated to second-class citizens. They were even denied right to vote. Being of unsound mind precluded them from holding any office.
All that will change now," said Deb.
Ray added that the moment demands bold, rights-affirming governance, not piecemeal or tokenistic gestures. "The judiciary has spoken. It is now the executive's responsibility to institutionalise this vision into everyday governance so that mental health is not only constitutionally protected, but meaningfully lived," she added.