Abetment of suicide charges should not be ‘mechanically’ invoked: SC
(Source – Indian Express, Section – Explained – Page No. – 12)
| Topic: GS2 – Polity |
| Context |
| ● The Supreme Court has emphasized the need to sensitize investigation agencies and courts regarding abetment of suicide cases under Section 306 of the IPC. |
Analysis of the news:
About Section 306 of IPC
- Section 306 of IPC deals with the Abetment of suicide whereas the same provision has been covered under Section 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023(BNS).
- It states that 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.
Sensitizing Investigation Agencies and Courts in Abetment of Suicide Cases
- The Supreme Court cautioned against the misuse of the provision (Section 306 of the IPC) to satisfy the immediate emotions of a deceased’s family, stressing that only genuine cases meeting the legal threshold should lead to prosecution.
- The Court highlighted the abuse of process in cases lacking adequate evidence of abetment.
Legal Framework for Abetment of Suicide
- Section 306 IPC criminalizes abetment of suicide, which is defined under Section 107 IPC as acts of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding.
- Prosecution under this section requires proof of direct instigation or acts that leave the deceased with no alternative but to die by suicide.
- Punishment includes up to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine. However, conviction rates remain low at 17.5% in 2022, highlighting challenges in proving intent and direct abetment.
The Supreme Court’s Intervention in the Bank Manager Case
- In the case of a bank manager accused of abetting a borrower’s suicide, the Supreme Court discharged the manager, stating that mere allegations of harassment for loan recovery do not meet the threshold for abetment.
- It criticized trial courts for framing charges mechanically and stressed the need for a practical approach in evaluating evidence.
- The Court reiterated that casual exchanges or hyperboles should not be misconstrued as instigation to suicide.
Higher Standard for Proof in Workplace-Related Cases
- The Supreme Court has set a higher bar for proof in abetment of suicide cases stemming from workplace or official relationships.
- In cases like M Mohan v State (2011) and Ude Singh v State of Haryana (2019), the Court emphasized that prosecution requires evidence of direct incitement or a continuous course of conduct that left the deceased with no alternative but suicide.
- It clarified that indirect acts or vague allegations without proof of intent do not suffice for prosecution.
Conclusion
- The Court has repeatedly cautioned against unnecessary prosecutions under Section 306 IPC, highlighting the need for evidence-based investigations and judicial prudence.
- A balance must be struck between protecting genuine victims and preventing misuse of the law, which could otherwise lead to undue harassment of accused individuals.
- Sensitization of investigating agencies and trial courts is critical to ensure fair application of the law.
| What is the Statistics Related to Suicide in India? |
| ● The data compiled by the NCRB is based on police-recorded first information reports (FIRs).
○Surge in Student Suicides: Student suicides in India have surged by 4% annually, outpacing the overall suicide rate increase of 2%, despite a likely “under reporting” of student suicide cases. ○Gender Disparity: In 2022, male students constituted 53% of total student suicides. While male suicides decreased by 6% from 2021, female student suicides saw a 7% rise. ○Decade Trend: Over the past decade, despite a slight decrease in the 0-24 age group population, student suicides rose significantly from 6,654 to 13,044. ○State-Wise Distribution: Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and Madhya Pradesh reported the highest numbers of student suicides, collectively accounting for one-third of the national total. |
| Practice Question: Critically analyze the challenges in prosecuting abetment of suicide cases under Section 306 of the IPC. Discuss the role of the judiciary in ensuring a balance between preventing misuse of the law and delivering justice to genuine victims. (150 Words /10 marks) |
For more such UPSC related Current Affairs, Check Out –UNICEF Report 2025: Addressing Global Challenges Faced by Children
