Students Cannot Be Punished For Asking Questions; Intolerance Is At Odds With Constitution: Justice Ujjal ... - Live Law

**Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan – Students’ Right to Question Must Be Protected**

In a recent sitting of the Supreme Court, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan warned that any attempt to punish students for asking questions or expressing dissent “runs afoul of the Constitution.” Speaking in response to a petition filed by a student federation that challenged a university’s disciplinary action against several undergraduates for organizing a debate on “national integration,” the judge emphasized that a vibrant democracy depends on the free exchange of ideas, especially within educational institutions. “Intolerance is antithetical to the spirit of our Constitution,” Justice Bhuyan said, adding that the courts have a duty to safeguard academic freedom from punitive administrative overreach.

The remarks come amid a spate of controversies surrounding student activism across the country. In the past few months, universities in Delhi, Karnataka and West Bengal have faced criticism for imposing penalties on students who raised questions about government policies, campus safety and social justice. Critics argue that such measures echo a broader trend of “intolerance” that stifles dissent, while the administration of several institutions claim they are merely enforcing discipline. Legal experts note that the Supreme Court’s reaffirmation of students’ constitutional rights could set a precedent for overturning similar punitive actions in the future.

Justice Bhuyan’s observations were echoed by his colleague, Justice Indu Sabhapathy Nagarathna, who recently warned that the Bar Council of India (BCI) risks losing public confidence if it fails to respect the autonomy and dignity of its members. The comment followed the BCI’s abrupt reversal of a decision concerning NALSAR University of Law, which many lawyers and academics described as a “about‑turn” that undermined the institution’s standing. Together, the two judges underscored a growing concern within the judiciary that intolerance—whether in academia or the legal profession—undermines democratic values and the rule of law.

---