This post
is based on a brief part of the paper published in Statute Law Review (citation
10.1093/slr/hmv003)
The sad
end to the grief- stricken life (life, in technical sense) of Aruna Shanbaug
has reopened the debate of euthanasia, Right to commit suicide, assisted-
suicide amongst various other issues related to our Criminal Justice System before
our society and policymakers. This post is concerned, within its thin ambit,
with the issue of whether decriminalising the only suicide related provision in
the Indian Penal Code, which is § 309,
would be a legally sound step.
It is submitted that the
efforts have been undertaken by the Parliament, are mistaken even if the
intention is right. To understand the argument, it would be essential and
prudent to understand the origins of suicide as an offence and an offence under
IPC.
Origins of Suicide as
an Offence and in Context of IPC
At common law suicide was a form of homicide. In the words of Hawkins, “homicide
properly so called is either against a man’s own life or that of another.”[1]
While wilful homicide was felony, in cases of suicide chattels of the guilty
were forfeited to the Crown.[2]
While suicide per se is not defined in the Indian
Penal Code, however, by referring to Lord Macaulay’s Indian Penal Notes one can
understand Macaulay interpreted Suicide to be a “self- murder”.[3]
The interpretation is also
clearly borne out from the provisions defining ‘culpable homicide’[4] and
‘murder’[5] since
these provisions hold killing as an offence without
stating any qualification that person killed and person killing cannot be the
same person. Therefore, merely by repealing § 309[6],
suicide as an offence of self- murder would still remain.
distinction between “An Act Forbidden by Law”
as opposed to “An Act Made Punishable by Law”
Here, it is important to
distinguish between ‘an act forbidden by law’ as against ‘an act made
punishable by law’. The issue arises as to why while Indian Penal Code forbids
culpable homicide/ murder and punishes it, the latter provision, i.e. for punishing (different from forbidding) suicide is not there with
respect to suicide cases.
The answer can be found in
the decision in the case of Chikkam Ammiraju And Ors. v. Chikkam Seshamma
And Anr,[7] where the Court opined that it is simply due
to the fact that there is
no one left to be punished and consequently, the case is beyond the Court’s
jurisdiction.
Conclusion
Therefore, in light of the
above discussion, it is submitted that there is a need to study the statutory
framework, else every step sought to be taken (how mighty be the intentions),
would be rendered redundant.
[2] ‘Law and Morality’, edited by Louis
Bloom Cooper and Gravin Drewry, pp. 201-7 (1976).
[3] Indian Penal Code with Notes by W.
Morgan and A.G. MacPherson, Harvard Law School Library, pp. 273, 276
[4] S. 299, Indian Penal Code 1860
states, “Whoever causes death by doing an
act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such
bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely
by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.”
[5] S. 300, Indian Penal Code 1860
states, “Except in the cases hereinafter
excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused
is done with the intention of causing death…”
[6]
S. 309, Indian Penal Code 1860
states, “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 or with fine,
or with both.”
