Students cannot face punitive action for questioning or dissenting views: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Sunday said students cannot be threatened with punitive action merely for questioning established positions or expressing views different from those in authority, describing such action as unconstitutional and a misuse of power. Addressing the 13th convocation ceremony for postgraduate students of National Law University, Delhi, Justice Bhuyan said universities must remain spaces where ideas can be challenged, difficult questions asked and disagreements addressed through reason rather than hostility.

“When students express a different point of view, when students ask questions, they cannot be threatened with punitive action. That is unconstitutional. That is a misuse of power and office,” he said. Justice Bhuyan said the habit of thinking independently should begin within universities, where students should feel free to examine accepted positions without fearing consequences. A university, he said, should expose individuals to ideas different from their own and allow disagreements to be debated rationally. “If we want a democratic society that respects liberty and difference, that culture has to begin from the universities,” he said.

‘Intolerant mind’ at odds with Constitution

Justice Bhuyan said tolerance was not merely desirable social behaviour but a constitutional value essential to sustaining a liberal democracy. Referring to India as the land of Buddha and Gandhi, he said there should be no place for an “intolerant mind”, which he described as a form of violence. The Constitution protects the freedom to speak, think and hold different beliefs, he said, warning that the democratic framework begins to weaken when dissent is treated as something that must be silenced or punished.

“The ability to live with disagreement is, therefore, not merely a social virtue. It is the very essence of a liberal constitutional democracy,” Justice Bhuyan said. He asserted that the strength of a democracy is reflected not merely in how it treats popular opinions but also in how it responds to views that may be difficult, unpopular or inconvenient. “A democracy becomes meaningful not when everyone speaks the same language of thought but when different voices can co-exist, be heard and be treated with dignity,” he said.

Legal community has larger responsibility

Justice Bhuyan said a free society would naturally contain different opinions and beliefs, and participation in public life could be meaningful only when there was space for dissent. The right to question, he stressed, should not be regarded as an act of defiance, while the ability to accommodate disagreement remained fundamental to constitutional democracy.

Addressing the graduating law students, Justice Bhuyan said lawyers and legal scholars had a particular responsibility to ensure that constitutional principles remained central even during periods of disagreement and dissent. Liberty, equality, dignity and justice, he said, must continue to guide the understanding of law regardless of whether the opinions involved are popular or uncomfortable.