End, a Contradiction

Written by Hritam Saha

Attempting suicide is not alien to humanity, but can a suicide survivor be punished? The answer to this question lies in Section 309 of the IPC and Section 115 of The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.

Section 309 of IPC punishes 'attempt to commit suicide' but Section 115 of The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, presumes mental stress in a person who has attempted to commit suicide and thereby exempts a person from Section 309 of IPC. However, the said presumption is rebuttable because the person who attempted suicide shall be punished if found that he has attempted suicide under no mental stress, for example, to blackmail a person. Therefore, Section 115 compels the court to take a rebuttable presumption of mental stress which the court can also take under Section 114 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 which allows presumption of natural events, for example, ice melts at room temperature. Therefore, a person one who attempted to commit suicide is naturally presumed to be under mental stress. Hence, before the advent of Section 115, Section 114 was used for such presumption, however, the presumption under Section 115 (shall take) is a compulsion for the court but under Section 114 (may take) is discretion, and the removal of Section 309 will grant immunity to the blackmailer for whom 'suicide attempt' is a weapon. In 1971 and 2008, the Law Commission of India recommended the government remove Section 309 of the IPC.

Is there any 'Right to Die'?

The Supreme Court of India held, "Life and death are inseparable. Every moment our bodies change… life is not disconnected from death. Dying is a part of the process of living". It allowed passive euthanasia that removes the, life support of a patient suffering death inevitable disease and his/her painful survival will be most painful but not more.

However, active euthanasia that compels the death of a person by doing an act like injecting him/her with poison, is allegedly not allowed. Therefore, the 'right to die' is allowed when your body has lost the capability to survive. 'right to risk life' is a fundamental right under freedom of right to work, like in the military and police. But can the 'right to risk life' also be read as 'right to die' when one feels that he/she is a burden? Article 21 prohibits the state from eviscerating the life of a person except by law, however, it does not disallow a person to take his own life and taking away one's own life will not infringe the right of another. Therefore, no express provision is there in the Constitution that is disallowing from ending one's own life.

We humans know how to bring another person to life but cannot bring ourselves to life however, we know how to end our life and that of others. The Almighty has not given us the power to take birth by ourselves but has bestowed us with the potential to end our own life, and ergo, there must be a reason for that and that is after our birth we sit on the driving seat of our life, and ergo, it is up to us how far we want to drive because some may want to end in school, some in college and some may never want to end.

Write a comment ...

The Drain Team

The Drain is a news, analysis, opinion and information initiative. We shed light on the overlooked stories which are shaping the contemporary world. We aim to bring out stories which are usually ditched and drained by the mainstream media, but are of utmost importance to the people.