CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SUICIDE: IPC SECTION 309 VS ARTICLE 21

CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SUICIDE:IPC SECTION 309 VS ARTICLE 21

Constitutional Validity Of Suicide: 

IPC Section 309 Vs Article 21

Nowadays Suicide has become a major problem in our country. The rate of suicide is increasing day by day. There are many reasons to commit a suicide.  Life is very complex in nature. There are many reasons to commit a suicide. It can be mental, physical, spiritual, political etc. For example, farmers are committing suicide because the government is not fulfilling their demands and they are not able to earn their bread and butter.

Some are committing suicide due to pressure from relatives, friends, colleagues etc. Life is full of worries and tensions. It depends on how we face the hurdles and overcome the barriers in the life.

Law from time to time has trying to overcome this problem but most times fail to do so.Although section 309  in the IPC has provided punishment for the person who attempts to commit suicide, but still the no decrease in the suicide rate, in fact, it is increasing day by day.

Section 309 in The Indian Penal Code

309. Attempt to commit suicide.—Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offence, shall he punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year 1[or with fine, or with both].

But the validity of section 309 has been always challenged by Article 21 of the Constitution of India which says that No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. And also liberty of person and protection of life are two essential elements in an ordered society. Thus, the right to life and personal liberty is guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Article 21 of the Constitution Of India (1949)

21. Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

The Delhi High Court in a case State vs Sanjay Kumar Bhatia observed that the continuance of Section 309, I.P.C. is an anachronism worthless of a human society like ours. 

The Court also held that there need is for humane, civilized as well as socially oriented outlook and penology. 

The court also further added that a man, who is driven to such type of frustration and willing to take his own life, should be sent to a psychiatric clinic instead of sending to a jail to mingle with criminals.

The Indian constitution under Article 21 discusses the right to life as the fundamental right of every citizen. It also confers right to live with dignity, sometimes confer “Right to die” which is contradicting to IPC Section 309. But it doesn’t mean that right to die should be allowed in the constitution.

A Division Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of P. Rathinam vs the Union of India said that IPC Section 309 violates Article 21, as the right to live as per the Article can be said to bring in its trail and the right to not live a forced life.  Court also added that section 309 of the IPC needs to be obliterated from the statute book to improve our penal laws.