Abetment of Suicide under BNS: Sections 107 and 108, Constitutional Framework and Landmark Cases

Suicide, in Indian law, is no longer an offence. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, effectively decriminalised attempted suicide (though a narrow provision, Section 226 BNS, retains criminality for attempts made to compel a public servant). What remains criminal is the abetment of suicide by another person. Sections 107 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, address this. Section 107 punishes abetment of suicide of a child or a person of unsound mind, with the highest severity: death or imprisonment for life. Section 108 punishes ordinary abetment of suicide with imprisonment up to ten years and fine. The Supreme Court, in Gian Kaur v State of Punjab, has confirmed the constitutional validity of these provisions. This module walks through the two sections, the abetment framework of Sections 45 to 60 BNS, the constitutional debate on the right to die, the decriminalisation of attempted suicide, and the leading Indian cases on abetment of suicide in the domestic context and the workplace context.

1. Introduction

Suicide in Indian law

Suicide is the intentional taking of one's own life. Historically, the Indian criminal law treated suicide as an offence. Section 309 IPC, since the enactment of the 1860 code, criminalised attempted suicide. This treatment reflected the Victorian moral view that suicide was a sin against God and a wrong against the state. Modern understandings of mental health, suicide prevention, and human dignity have led to a substantial rethinking. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, effectively decriminalised attempted suicide by providing that a person who attempts suicide shall be presumed, unless proved otherwise, to have severe stress and shall not be tried and punished under Section 309 IPC.

Abetment of suicide as a distinct offence

While suicide itself is no longer criminal, abetting another person to commit suicide remains a serious offence. The rationale is that abetment involves the abettor's causal contribution to another person's death, and the abettor bears moral and legal responsibility for that contribution. Sections 107 and 108 BNS codify this liability.

The decriminalisation of attempted suicide

The BNS carries forward the effective decriminalisation of attempted suicide. Section 309 IPC has not been retained as a general offence. Only Section 226 BNS, a narrow provision, retains criminal liability for attempts to compel a public servant. Ordinary attempted suicide, without any such context, is not an offence under the BNS.

2. The General Abetment Framework

Sections 45 to 60 BNS overviewed

Sections 107 and 108 BNS both use the concept of abetment, which is defined in the general abetment framework of Sections 45 to 60 BNS (formerly Sections 107 to 120 IPC). The general framework provides:

• Section 45: definition of abetment (three methods).
• Section 46: definition of abettor.
• Sections 47 to 60: various forms of abetment and their consequences.

The three methods of abetment

Application to abetment of suicide

The three methods apply to abetment of suicide as much as to abetment of any other offence:

• Instigation to suicide: encouraging, provoking, or urging the person to commit suicide.
• Conspiracy to suicide: participating in a plan for the person to commit suicide.
• Aid to suicide: providing means, opportunity, or other assistance for the suicide.

In practice, most abetment of suicide prosecutions involve instigation. Continuous harassment, systematic humiliation, or specific provocative acts that drive the deceased to suicide are the common fact patterns.

3. Section 107 BNS: Abetment of Suicide of Child or Insane Person

Text of Section 107

The four categories protected

• Any person under eighteen years of age.
• Any insane person.
• Any delirious person.
• Any idiot (a category from the classical criminal law, referring to persons with severe intellectual disability).
• Any person in a state of intoxication.

These categories share the common feature that the deceased was not, at the time of the suicide, in a position to exercise the full autonomy of a rational adult. Abetting the suicide of such a person is regarded as particularly grave, because the deceased could not defend himself through the exercise of his own judgment.

Punishment: death or life imprisonment

The punishment is drastic: death or imprisonment for life, or imprisonment up to ten years, and fine. The court has substantial discretion. In practice, imprisonment for life is more common than the death penalty, though the rarest of rare doctrine of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab governs cases where death is considered.

The rationale for the enhanced severity

• The vulnerability of the deceased. A child, an insane person, or an intoxicated person is particularly susceptible to abetment. The abettor's conduct is more directly causative of the death.
• The absence of full autonomy in the deceased. A rational adult can resist provocation to suicide; a child or insane person cannot equally do so.
• The moral aggravation. Preying on the vulnerable is a distinct moral wrong that the criminal law justly punishes with special severity.

4. Section 108 BNS: Ordinary Abetment of Suicide

Text of Section 108

The three ingredients

• The deceased committed suicide.
• The accused abetted the suicide within the meaning of Section 45 BNS (instigation, conspiracy, or aid).
• The accused's abetment was intentional; the mens rea of abetment is required.

Punishment: up to ten years and fine

The punishment is imprisonment up to ten years and fine. The court has discretion to award any sentence up to the maximum. In practice, sentences of five to ten years are common in cases where the abetment is clearly established. Where the case involves systematic cruelty over an extended period leading to the suicide, sentences at the higher end of the range are typical.

5. What Constitutes Abetment of Suicide

Instigation to suicide

Instigation is the most common method of abetment of suicide. Explicit instigation (telling the person to kill herself, provoking her with the intention that she do so) is unambiguous. Implicit instigation is more difficult:

• Systematic humiliation and taunting.
• Threats of harm or public exposure that create despair.
• Sustained cruelty that undermines the person's will to live.
• Specific provocative acts (such as suggesting suicide as an escape from a situation the abettor created).

Continuous harassment

Aid and encouragement

Aid to suicide includes providing the means (poison, weapons, ropes), providing the opportunity (leaving the person alone in circumstances where they can act), or otherwise facilitating the act. Aid must be intentional: the accused must have intended to facilitate the suicide, not merely have provided assistance for other purposes.

The mens rea requirement

6. The Constitutional Framework

Article 21 and the right to die debate

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life. A question that has arisen repeatedly is whether the right to life includes a right to die. The Supreme Court's position has evolved:

• P. Rathinam v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 394: the Court held that Article 21 includes the right to die, and Section 309 IPC (attempted suicide) was unconstitutional.
• Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648: a Constitution Bench overruled Rathinam, holding that Article 21 does not include a right to die by suicide, but does include a right to die with dignity (which includes end-of-life autonomy).
• Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454: passive euthanasia permitted in specified circumstances.
• Common Cause v. Union of India, (2018) 5 SCC 1: living wills recognised; right to die with dignity affirmed.

Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab

Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India

Common Cause v. Union of India

7. The Decriminalisation of Attempted Suicide

Section 309 IPC and its history

Section 309 IPC punished attempted suicide with imprisonment up to one year and fine. The provision was one of the oldest in Indian criminal law, dating from 1860. It was widely criticised as inhumane, unscientific, and counter-productive: it punished people who were already in extreme distress, and it deterred those in crisis from seeking help.

The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017

Section 115 of the Mental Healthcare Act effectively decriminalised attempted suicide. The presumption of severe stress and the exemption from Section 309 IPC together meant that attempted suicide was no longer prosecuted in ordinary cases. The BNS carries forward this position by not retaining Section 309 IPC as a general offence.

Section 226 BNS: the narrow remaining provision

Section 226 BNS is a narrow criminal provision retained in the BNS. It punishes attempted suicide only where done with intent to compel or restrain a public servant. The rationale is that such attempts (dharna, threatened self-immolation to obtain government action, and similar situations) can amount to coercion of public authorities. Ordinary attempted suicide, without any such intention, is not covered.

8. Section 117 BSA: The Presumption in Marriage Context

Section 117 BSA provides a discretionary presumption of abetment of suicide in specified marriage cases. Three foundational facts:

• A woman committed suicide.
• Within seven years of her marriage.
• Her husband or his relative subjected her to cruelty.

Where these facts are proved, the court may presume that the suicide was abetted. The presumption is discretionary (may presume), not mandatory (compare Section 118 BSA on dowry death, which is mandatory). The court exercises discretion considering all circumstances. The presumption significantly assists prosecutions for abetment of suicide of wives who died within seven years of marriage.

9. Judicial Elaboration and Landmark Cases

10. Consolidated Landmark Judgments

• Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648. Constitutional validity of Sections 306 and 309 IPC. No right to die under Article 21.
• Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454. Passive euthanasia permitted.
• Common Cause v. Union of India, (2018) 5 SCC 1. Right to die with dignity. Living wills recognised.
• Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618. Continuous harassment alone not abetment.
• Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, (2020) 10 SCC 200. Ingredients of abetment carefully examined.
• M. Mohan v. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626. Cruelty and abetment of suicide as distinct offences.
• Amalendu Pal v. State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707. Workplace pressure does not automatically amount to abetment.
• Sanju v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2002) 5 SCC 371. Single quarrel not sufficient.
• Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal, (2012) 9 SCC 734. Systematic workplace humiliation may constitute abetment.
• Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi), (2009) 16 SCC 605. Intention required.
• K. V. Prakash Babu v. State of Karnataka, (2016) 12 SCC 748. Marital disputes vs abetment.
• Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330. Quashing frivolous complaints.
• Kishori Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2007) 10 SCC 797. Abetment framework in Section 306 IPC.
• P. Rathinam v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 394. Held Section 309 IPC unconstitutional. Later overruled by Gian Kaur.
• Wazir Chand v. State of Haryana, (1989) 1 SCC 244. Early interpretation of Section 306 in dowry harassment context.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Section 108 BNS?

Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 306 IPC), punishes abetment of suicide. Where a person commits suicide and another person abetted the suicide, the abettor is punishable with imprisonment up to ten years and fine. Abetment is defined by Section 45 BNS: instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid. The mens rea of abetment must be established: the accused must have intended to drive the deceased to suicide.

What is Section 107 BNS?

Section 107 BNS (formerly Section 305 IPC) punishes abetment of suicide of a person under eighteen years, an insane person, a delirious person, an idiot, or a person in a state of intoxication. Punishment: death or imprisonment for life, or imprisonment up to ten years, and fine. The enhanced severity reflects the vulnerability of these categories and the moral gravity of preying on such persons.

Is attempted suicide an offence under the BNS?

Ordinary attempted suicide is not an offence under the BNS. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, provided that a person who attempts suicide shall be presumed to have severe stress and shall not be tried under Section 309 IPC. The BNS does not retain Section 309 IPC as a general offence. Only Section 226 BNS retains criminal liability for a narrow category: attempts made with intent to compel or restrain a public servant from discharging his official duty.

What did Gian Kaur v State of Punjab (1996) decide?

A five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court considered the constitutional validity of Sections 306 and 309 IPC (now Sections 108 BNS and the effectively decriminalised attempted suicide). The Court held that both were constitutionally valid. Article 21 does not include a right to die by suicide. The right to life is a right to natural life, and the state has a legitimate interest in preventing suicide. Later cases (Aruna Shanbaug, Common Cause) refined the position on end-of-life autonomy without disturbing the core Gian Kaur holding.

What is required to prove abetment of suicide?

The prosecution must prove: (i) the deceased committed suicide; (ii) the accused abetted the suicide within the meaning of Section 45 BNS (instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid); and (iii) the accused had the mens rea of abetment, that is, the intention to drive the deceased to suicide. Mere harassment, marital discord, or workplace pressure is not enough. There must be specific conduct with the intention or knowledge that it would lead to suicide, as held in Ramesh Kumar v State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618.

What is Section 117 BSA?

Section 117 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (formerly Section 113A IEA), provides a discretionary presumption of abetment of suicide in specified marriage cases. Where a woman commits suicide within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that her husband or his relative subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume that the suicide was abetted. The presumption is discretionary (may presume), and the Court exercises discretion considering all circumstances. This assists prosecutions in the domestic context.

Related Topics on The Legal Bridge

For a fuller picture, read these companion notes on adjacent doctrines and provisions:

• Cruelty under BNS: Section 85 that often accompanies abetment of suicide charges in domestic contexts.
• Dowry Death under BNS: Section 80 that operates alongside abetment of suicide framework.
• Abetment Chapter IV: the general abetment framework of Sections 45 to 60 BNS.
• Constitutional Rights: Article 21 as interpreted in Gian Kaur, Aruna Shanbaug, and Common Cause.