INTRODUCTION

 Ragging, often disguised as an initiation ritual, has evolved into a serious issue that causes mental and physical harm to students. Despite legal prohibitions and institutional measures, it continues to thrive due to weak enforcement and social acceptance in some academic spaces.

Definition

According to Supreme Court in Vishwa Jagriti Mission Case (2001)

• Ragging is defined as any disorderly conduct, whether by words spoken or written or by an act, has the effect of teasing, treating, or handling with rudeness a fresher or a junior student. 

• Indulging in a rowdy or undisciplined activity that causes or is likely to cause annoyance, hardship, or psychological harm or to raise fear or apprehension thereof in a fresher or junior student.

• Asking the students to do any act or perform something that such students will not do in the ordinary course and which has the effect of causing or generating a sense of shame or embarrassment so as to adversely affect the physique or psyche of a fresher or junior student

• The cause of indulging in ragging is deriving sadistic pleasure or showing off power, authority or superiority by the seniors over their juniors or freshers.

Statistics  (box)

• RTI data (2012–2023): Lists 78 deaths linked to ragging, highlighting the severe consequences.

• Deaths by State: Among 78 deaths linked to ragging (2012–2023), Maharashtra led with 10, followed by UP and Tamil Nadu (7 each), Telangana (6), Andhra (5), and Madhya Pradesh (4).

• States with Highest Complaints: Uttar Pradesh (1,202), Madhya Pradesh (795), West Bengal (728), Odisha (517), Bihar (476), and Maharashtra (393) topped the list of reported cases.

• Institutions with Most Cases: BHU (72 cases), MANIT Bhopal (53), and MKCG Medical College, Odisha (49) reported the highest complaints.

Recent Incidents

• Kottayam Nursing College Incident (February 2025): In Kerala's Kottayam district, five third-year nursing students were arrested for brutally ragging a junior. A disturbing video showed the victim tied to a bed, subjected to needle pricks, and having stinging lotion applied to his wounds.

• KIIT Incident (February 2025):  Prakriti Lamsal, a Nepalese student at KIIT, Odisha, died in her hostel room after allegedly facing harassment, leading to protests and the forced eviction of over 500 Nepalese students. Following diplomatic intervention from Nepal, KIIT revoked the evictions, apologized, and suspended officials.

• Mihir Ahmed Issue (January 2025): 15-year-old Mihir Ahammed, a student at Global Public School in Ernakulam, Kerala, died by suicide after enduring severe bullying and ragging by his peers. His mother, Rajna P.M., alleged that Mihir was subjected to brutal harassment, including being forced to lick a toilet seat.

• Sidharthan Issue (February 2024): A 20-year-old veterinary student at Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University in Pookode, Wayanad, was found dead in his hostel room. Investigations revealed that he had been subjected to severe ragging and physical assault by senior students, The assaults included stripping him of his undergarments, beating him with belts and cables, and denying him medical attention, leading to his death by hanging. 

Important Interventions

• Vishwa Jagriti Mission Case (2001)

• The Supreme Court recognised ragging as a growing menace in educational institutions and, under Articles 32 and 142 of the Constitution, issued guidelines to prevent and address it effectively.

•  The Court emphasised institutional responsibility, requiring anti-ragging awareness, monitoring, and strict punishments like suspension, expulsion, and financial penalties, while discouraging excessive police involvement.

•  Institutions failing to curb ragging could face funding cuts or disaffiliation, and the UGC was directed to publicise and enforce these guidelines across all educational institutions.

• R.K. Raghavan Committee (2007)

• Appointed by the Supreme Court and submitted a report titled ‘The Menace of Ragging in Educational Institutions and Measures to Curb It’. 

• Categorised ragging as a form of “psychopathic behaviour and a reflection of deviant personalities”

• It noted that most State laws focus only on prohibition rather than prevention, arguing that “while prevention must lead to prohibition, the reverse need not be true.”

• It recommended strict enforcement of anti-ragging policies by regulatory authorities to ensure safe and academically sound campuses.

Regulations

• UGC Regulations on Curbing The Menace Of Ragging In Higher Educational Institutions, 2009 

• Scope: These regulation apply to all the institutions including:

• Under the Central/provincial/state act

• Deemed university under the UGC Act, 1956

• All other educational institutions

• Legal Framework

• Clause 9.4 empowers the UGC to take action against non-compliant institutions.

• No institution has been penalised under this clause since 2009.

• Student Affidavits and Compliance

• Students must submit annual affidavits pledging to refrain from ragging.

• RTI data (2012–2022) shows only 4.49% of students complied with this requirement.

• Awareness and Preventive Measures

• Strengthen and augment anti-ragging mechanism by way of adequate publicity through various mediums 

• Constitution of Anti-Ragging committee and Anti-Ragging squad

• Establish Anti-Ragging Cell

• Install CCTV cameras at vital points

• Organise anti-ragging interaction, workshops and seminars for the freshers and the senior students

• After the commencement of the academic year organised professional counselling of the students

• Ensure identification of trouble triggers and take appropriate action

• Mention of Anti-Ragging warnings in the institution’s E-prospectus and E-information booklets/ brochures

• Conduct surprise inspections of hostels, students, accommodation, canteens, rest cum recreational rooms, toilets, bus stands, and all other strategic locations

• Undertake all other measures that would augur well in preventing/ quelling ragging and any uncalled-for behaviour and the incident.

• The AICTE and the Medical Council of India have issued separate 2009 regulations under their respective Acts to prevent and prohibit ragging in technical and medical institutions.

Laws to Prevent Ragging in India

• Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS): While ragging is not a specific offence, it could be penalised under several other provisions of the BNS

• Section 79:  Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman

• Section 105: Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder

• Section 118: Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means

• Section 129: Wrongful Restraint

• Section 127: Wrongful Confinement

• State Specific Laws: Several Indian states, including Tripura, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Assam, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Goa, and Jammu & Kashmir, have enacted laws between 1990 and 2011 to prohibit and penalise ragging in educational institutions.

• The Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act , 1998

• Students involved in ragging face up to two years of imprisonment, a fine of up to ₹10,000, dismissal from the institution, and a three-year ban from admission elsewhere.

• Complaints must be investigated within seven days, with immediate suspension if allegations are proven; failure of institutional heads to act is considered abetment and punishable accordingly.

Challenges

• Ineffective Implementation: Supreme Court guidelines (issued 15 years ago) remain largely on paper, with colleges failing to enforce preventive measures effectively.

• Lack of Monitoring & Accountability: Many institutions do not have active anti-ragging committees, and authorities fail to track and act on complaints in real time.

• Frivolous vs. Genuine Complaints: Authorities often dismiss complaints as “frivolous” or exaggerated, making it difficult for victims to seek justice.

• No Clear Legal Definition: The absence of a universally accepted legal definition of ragging makes enforcement difficult and creates loopholes in legal action.

• Fear of Retaliation & Social Stigma: Victims hesitate to report ragging due to fear of being ostracised, labelled as weak, or facing further harassment.

• Severe Psychological Impact: Prolonged ragging results in depression, anxiety, PTSD, and suicides, yet mental health support remains inadequate.

• Token Institutional Compliance: Many institutions conduct awareness programs as a formality but fail to establish concrete deterrents like zero-tolerance policies.

• Weak Law Enforcement: Ragging is often treated as a disciplinary issue rather than a criminal offence, leading to delayed or insufficient action by police.

• Variability Across Institutions: Ragging cases are higher in professional colleges like engineering and medical institutions, where hierarchical power structures are stronger.

WAY FORWARD

• Strict Enforcement & Institutional Accountability: Colleges must be mandated to enforce Supreme Court guidelines, with penalties for non-compliance.
• Clear & Standardised Legal Definition: Laws must explicitly define ragging, differentiate its severity, and prescribe proportionate punishment.
• Independent Anti-Ragging Committees: External regulatory bodies should monitor and act on complaints, ensuring colleges cannot suppress cases.
• Stronger Victim Protection Mechanisms: Establish anonymous complaint portals, protect identities, and ensure non-retaliation policies in institutions.
  Example: The UGC operates a 24/7 anti-ragging helpline with 8-9 attendants in three shifts. Over 8,000 complaints were received from 2012 to 2022, showing a 208% surge. Complaints rose from 358 in 2012 to 1,115 in 2019, slightly declining post-pandemic to 1,103 in 2022 and 756 till October 2023.
  50% of cases are resolved within 7 days, 30% within 15 days, and 20% within 40 days.
  Complaints are shared with institutions and police for immediate action.Mandatory Counselling & Psychological Support: Colleges must provide mental health services for both victims and perpetrators to address trauma and behaviour.Criminalisation of Severe Ragging: Cases leading to physical harm, extreme mental trauma, or deaths should be treated as criminal offences with strict punishments.Beyond Token Awareness: Colleges should engage students in ongoing interactive sessions, using real-life case studies and survivor testimonies.Use of Technology for Prevention: AI-based campus monitoring, anonymous complaint apps, and CCTV surveillance in vulnerable areas can act as deterrents.

CONCLUSION

Eliminating ragging requires a multi-pronged approach, including strict enforcement of laws, institutional accountability, and cultural change within campuses. A collaborative effort from authorities, educators, and students is essential to ensure educational spaces remain safe and inclusive.

PYQ MAPPING

Q) How have digital initiatives in India contributed to the functioning of the education system in the country? Elaborate on your answer. (2020)

SAMPLE QUESTION

Q) The Supreme Court has issued clear guidelines against ragging, yet incidents persist. Examine the reasons and propose ways to strengthen compliance. (10 marks, 150 words)

Tags:
Polity

Keywords:
Ragging in Campus Education Ragging Raghavan Committee UGC Anti-Ragging committee Anti-Ragging Cell Anti-Ragging squad Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita BNS Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act