The Supreme Court of India, while frequently lauded for being among the most powerful institutions of its kind, has on equally several occasions been noted for an unusually high ratio of unanimous decisions. This paper explores whether the institutional features, to which we attribute the growing influence of the Court, are also reasons for the low dissent rate. It empirically examines the impact of features, such as the manner of constituting benches and allocating matters, the approachability and workload of the Court and prevailing seniority norms, on dissent. While dissents are usually explained by reference to the personality and politics of individual justices, here it is argued that the institutional context is of greater relevance in this choice to (not) dissent in India. The paper critically examines these norms and features that likely impose constraints on judicial behaviour, to in turn comment on the priorities and preferences of the Court.