Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Mental Health Platform For Legal Professionals

The Supreme Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking the creation of a platform to address mental health issues within the legal fraternity.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra emphasized that such initiatives are more suitable for voluntary efforts by bar associations rather than judicial intervention.

CJI Chandrachud underscored the importance of a grassroots approach, noting, “The Bar Association must take a lead and address issues of mental health... because when we say lawyers, we have lawyers all over the country.” He questioned the feasibility of a centralized approach, especially given the diversity of legal professionals across various regions, including district courts.

Additionally, the CJI pointed out the potential complications of restricting a mental health platform exclusively to lawyers, suggesting that such a model could lead to demands from other professions, such as doctors, engineers, and army personnel.

"Union of India will say, how can you do it for only lawyers? What about Chartered Accountants, Engineers, Army personnel, Doctors, etc.?" the CJI said. 

Representing the petitioner, Senior Advocate Balbir Singh argued that other professional bodies, like the Indian Medical Association (IMA), have existing mechanisms to support mental health. He expressed intent to file a representation with the Bar Council of India (BCI) under the Advocates Act, which includes provisions for lawyers' welfare. Acknowledging his intent, the Court recorded Singh’s submission.

Consequently, the Bench dismissed the PIL as withdrawn but clarified that this decision would not prevent the petitioner from pursuing remedies through alternative forums such as the BCI.

The petition filed by Chhavi Singh, who currently works as a behavioural coach in the Delhi NCR. She is the daughter of a lawyer practicing in the field of Trade Remedial Measures. In her petition, she contends, "It is clear that the profession desperately needs a mental health framework based on targeted research. The profession needs, more than ever before, a robust mental health framework in order to prevent acute distress leading to several mental and physical illnesses and, possibly, suicides. There is a glaring gap in the legal and medical framework as far as prevention of mental illnesses is concerned for a profession like this where stress is almost an occupational hazard."

The PIL filed through AoR Siddhartha Iyer states, "That broadly, there are two kinds of stress in the legal profession. First is that which a professional carries on account of their own circumstances, which come with their personal and professional lives. The second is the stress a legal professional comes to bear vicariously – on account of their clients."

"That mental stress often manifests in physical symptoms, leading to conditions such as tension headaches, gastrointestinal issues, muscle stiffness, and even more severe ailments. Somatics—the study of how mind and body influence each other—has demonstrated that many a physical disease can be traced to mental health. Legal professionals frequently disregard stress until it becomes chronic/debilitating or until it manifests in physical forms, and physical health until it too is too large a problem to ignore," the PIL reads. 

The petition states, "It is pertinent to note that within the legal fraternity, at least 20 professionals have committed suicides in the last 12 months alone. There may be many such other cases which are unreported as death was not attributed to mental health suffered in the professional life." The petitioner has sought directions for the constitution of a Committee/Commission to assess the status of mental health of lawyers in the country, taking assistance of stakeholders and expert bodies. 

Cause Title: Chhavi Singh v. Union of India [Diary No. 50482 / 2024]