Supreme Court Rejects PIL Requesting Mental Health Support Platform for Lawyers
The Supreme Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation that aimed to create a platform for addressing mental health issues among lawyers. The Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, stated that such initiatives should come from bar associations rather than the court. CJI Chandrachud highlighted the need for a grassroots approach, saying, “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 raised concerns about the practicality of a centralized system, given the variety of legal professionals in different areas, including district courts.
The CJI also mentioned that limiting a mental health platform to lawyers could create issues, as other professions like doctors and engineers might demand similar support. He noted, “Union of India will say, how can you do it for only lawyers? What about Chartered Accountants, Engineers, Army personnel, Doctors, etc.?” Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, representing the petitioner, pointed out that other professional groups, such as the Indian Medical Association (IMA), already have systems in place for mental health support. He plans to submit a request to the Bar Council of India (BCI) under the Advocates Act, which includes provisions for the welfare of lawyers. The Court acknowledged his intention.
As a result, the Bench dismissed the PIL as withdrawn but made it clear that the petitioner can still seek help through other channels like the BCI.Chhavi Singh, a behavioral coach in Delhi NCR and daughter of a trade lawyer, has filed a petition. In her petition, she argues that the legal profession urgently needs a mental health framework supported by targeted research. She emphasizes the importance of a strong mental health system to prevent severe distress that can lead to mental and physical health issues, including suicides. She points out a significant lack in the legal and medical systems regarding mental health prevention in a high-stress profession.
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) submitted by attorney Siddhartha Iyer highlights two main types of stress in the legal field. The first type arises from personal and professional life circumstances, while the second comes from the stress experienced vicariously through clients. The PIL explains that mental stress can lead to physical symptoms like tension headaches, digestive problems, and muscle stiffness. It notes that the connection between mind and body shows that many physical illnesses stem from mental health issues. Legal professionals often overlook stress until it becomes chronic or manifests physically, and they tend to neglect their physical health until it becomes a serious concern.
The petition highlights that at least 20 legal professionals have taken their own lives in the past year. It suggests there could be more cases that went unreported because their deaths were not linked to mental health issues related to their work. The petitioner is asking for the formation of a Committee or Commission to evaluate the mental health of lawyers in the country, with help from relevant stakeholders and expert organizations.
Cause Title: Chhavi Singh v. Union of India [Diary No. 50482 / 2024]
