Understanding Abetment of Suicide
Mahmodur Rahman :
Suicide or taking one’s own life is not an offence in our country,only an attempt to commit suicide is made an offence under the Penal Code 1860.It is an exceptional offence where the accused and the victim is the same person.An attempt to commit suicide is made an offence by Section 309 of the Penal Code.Abetment of Suicide on the other hand is made punishable under Section 305 and 306 of the Code with imprisonment which may extend to 10years and fine.
However issue of Abetment of Suicide has now again got attention after the death of Sushant Singh Rajput,a bollywood star was found dead at his apartment in Mumbai who have committed suicide.A Bihar based advocate has filed a case against a number of Bollywood bigwigs alleging that actor Sushant Singh Rajput was driven to suicide by an influential gang that virtually controlled the industry.The case is filed against Sections 306 (abetment of suicide), 109 (punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation.
Abetment in its literal sense means, the instigation of a person to do (or not to do) an act in a certain way, or aid given by some person to another either on his own choice or circumstances arising out of joint and constructive liability.In Abdul Latif Mridha VS Crown its was held that “Abetment must be an act facilitating the comission of the offence.It must be some act done either prior to or at the time of the comission of the offence”
Abetment to suicide involves a mental process of instigating an individual or intentionally helping a person in taking his life on his very own.
This section is based on a reasonable public policy to prevent other person’s involvement, instigation and aiding in terminating one’s life. It takes care of the situation and threats imposed by death baiters. Section 305 under Penal Code, 1860 provides for the punishment of an individual who abets the commission of the suicide of a child, not being eighteen years of age, an insane or delirious or an idiot individual or a person being intoxicated which is death or life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
A simple illustration of the said Section is as follows:-
-If A persuades B to kill himself by swallowing a rat poison tablet and B under his influence consumes it, then A would be liable as an abettor under this section.
However for conviction under this Section prosecution has to prove:-
1.That the act of Suicide is committed by the deceased.
2.That instigation done by the accused for committing suicide, and
3.Mental state of the accused.
When the suicide is committed then only the liability arises for abetment. In case of an attempted suicide, provisions of Section 306 will not be applicable.
It was observed in S.S. Chheena VS Vijay Kumar Mahajan that to convict someone under Section 305 or 306 what one need is specific presence of intention (mens rea) to commit the offence and the accused must made a positive move towards influencing the victim to take his or her own life.
Another case namely Sanju alias Sanjay Singh VS State of Madhya Pradesh that words such as ‘go and die’ during the quarrel doesn’t constitute as mens rea and it is uttered due to heat of the moment and thus the accused was not held liable under Section 306 of IPC.
In 1954 PLD Lah 103 It was held that throwing out challenge to deceased to take certain pill(found to be in arseni) if he did not sufficiently intoxicated was an offence under Section 305.
The necessity of intention is abetment of suicide was also discussed and proceeding was quashed in Abdul Khaleque Hawladar and ors VS State.
Abetment to suicide is made punishable in many countries and suicide is not a personal choice until influenced by other individuals and hence the stringent laws threatens the society and controls the commission of offences.
Thus after all the discussions we can see the said two Section are quite sensitive and has to be used responsibly.Sometimes the victim might take the decision unaccompanied by any act or instigation.Thus it would not be fair to blame another person for such foolishness.
Mahmodur Rahman : Student, Department of Law, Jagannath University
