Summary of Recent judgment

Case: P. Rathinam v Union of India



Date of Order / Judgment: 31st August, 2024

The Matter Heard by Bench: Justice B.L Hansaria, Justice R.M. Sahai

Background

P. Rathinam, the petitioner, challenged the constitutionality of Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalizes the act of attempting suicide. Rathinam contended that this provision was a violation of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, arguing that the state should not penalize individuals who are already in a state of severe mental distress.

Issues
  • 1. Whether Section 309 of the IPC, which criminalizes suicide attempts, violates the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
  • 2. Whether criminalizing attempted suicide is consistent with the principles of human dignity and compassion.
Summary:

The Supreme Court of India was tasked with determining whether Section 309 IPC infringed upon the constitutional right to life and personal liberty. Rathinam argued that penalizing individuals who attempt suicide exacerbates their suffering and fails to address the underlying mental health issues driving their actions.

In its examination, the Court recognized that the right to life under Article 21 encompasses the right to live with dignity, which includes the right to die. The Court noted that criminalizing suicide attempts could be counterproductive and detrimental to individuals in distress, who might require medical and psychological help rather than penal sanctions.

Decision

The Supreme Court declared Section 309 of the IPC unconstitutional, ruling that the provision violated the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court held that the right to life includes the right to die, and therefore, criminalizing attempted suicide was inconsistent with the principles of human dignity and compassion.