Suicide And Abetment Under Ipc
1. Attempted Suicide and Section 309 IPC
Section 309 IPC criminalizes the attempt to commit suicide. It states:
"Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offence, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both."
The rationale behind this section historically was to deter people from attempting suicide and to maintain the sanctity of life.
However, many have argued that suicide attempts are a result of mental illness or extreme distress and thus should be decriminalized (which India eventually did in 2017 through the Mental Healthcare Act).
2. Abetment of Suicide (Section 306 IPC)
Section 306 IPC deals with abetment of suicide. It states:
"If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
Here, abetment means instigating, engaging in a conspiracy, or aiding someone to commit suicide.
The key factor is causation — the abettor's actions must have a proximate role in causing the suicide.
Important Case Laws on Suicide and Abetment
1. State of Maharashtra v. Mukund More (2010)
Facts: Mukund More was accused of abetting his wife's suicide by harassing her over dowry demands.
Issue: Whether harassment could amount to abetment of suicide.
Decision: The Supreme Court held that harassment and cruelty can constitute abetment if it drives a person to commit suicide.
Significance: It clarified that continuous harassment and mental cruelty can be sufficient to attract Section 306 IPC.
2. Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Shankar (1996)
Facts: The case involved the legality of euthanasia in the context of suicide and abetment laws.
Decision: The court stated that the right to die is not a fundamental right under the Constitution, and attempt to commit suicide remains an offence under Section 309 IPC (at the time).
Significance: The court resisted attempts to decriminalize suicide or euthanasia on constitutional grounds.
3. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018)
Facts: This was a landmark case addressing euthanasia, the right to die, and indirectly suicide.
Decision: The court legalized passive euthanasia but left the decriminalization of suicide to legislative action.
Significance: It emphasized the difference between euthanasia and suicide and indicated evolving attitudes toward the right to die.
4. P. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994)
Facts: The petitioner challenged Section 309 IPC arguing that the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to die.
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that Section 309 IPC was unconstitutional, effectively decriminalizing suicide attempts.
Significance: It was a progressive decision focusing on personal liberty but was later overruled.
5. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996)
Facts: This case overruled the earlier decision in P. Rathinam and reinstated Section 309 IPC.
Decision: The Supreme Court held that the right to life under Article 21 does not include the right to die, and therefore, suicide attempts remain punishable.
Significance: The court clarified that attempting suicide is an offence, and the state has a duty to preserve life.
6. Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011)
Facts: This was about euthanasia but involved consideration of abetment and suicide laws.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed passive euthanasia for patients in a vegetative state but did not decriminalize suicide or abetment.
Significance: The court emphasized compassionate grounds but kept the criminal provisions intact.
Summary Table
| Case | Year | Key Point | Impact on IPC Provisions |
|---|---|---|---|
| State of Maharashtra v. Mukund More | 2010 | Harassment can amount to abetment of suicide | Expanded scope of Section 306 |
| Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Shankar | 1996 | Suicide attempt punishable under Section 309 | Affirmed Section 309 IPC |
| Common Cause v. Union of India | 2018 | Legalized passive euthanasia | Did not change Sections 309/306 |
| P. Rathinam v. Union of India | 1994 | Decriminalized attempt to suicide | Section 309 declared unconstitutional (overruled later) |
| Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab | 1996 | Right to life does not include right to die | Reinstated Section 309 IPC |
| Aruna Shanbaug Case | 2011 | Allowed passive euthanasia under strict conditions | Clarified euthanasia vs. suicide abetment |
Conclusion
Attempt to commit suicide was criminalized under Section 309 IPC, but the law is now mostly seen as outdated, with a greater emphasis on mental health.
Abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC is a serious offence punishable by law, especially when the abettor’s actions lead directly to the suicide.
The courts have evolved to balance the right to life, mental health concerns, and societal interests while interpreting these provisions.
Recent legislative and judicial trends favor compassion and rehabilitation over punishment for suicide attempts.
RELATED Blog
0 comments