The term suicide is made up of combination of two words i.e. ‘sui’ means self and ‘cide’ means killing. The act of committing suicide is committed by the person himself, irrespective of the method adopted for committing suicide.

Under section 309 of IPC whoever tries to commit suicide, does any act towards the commission of suicide. Offence punished with simple imprisonment which may extend to one year or fine or both.

In P Rathinam vs Union of India, 1994 the apex court held that the views expressed by Bombay high court in State of Maharashtra vs Maruti Sripati that article 21 includes right to die with dignity, right not to live forced life. Section 309 of IPC is an irrational section. Hence the apex court approved the views of Bombay High court in State of Maharashtra vs Maruti Sripati.

This gave rise to many questions like:

Judgment can impact youth minds which takes most of their decision in haste.

Right to die unnaturally should not be included in article 21 of constitution.

 What about People in disguise of protest threatens government to kill themselves?

Social problems like suicide due to love, failure of examination, not getting job, etc will be raised.

Different religion like Hinduism, Christianity, Jainism and others is also not support this view

In Gian Kaur vs State of Punjab, 1996 the apex court held that article 21 include right to die but it doesn’t include right to die or right to be killed.

The court finally held that section 309 of IPC is constitutional and not in violation of article 14 and 21 of constitution.

But under section 115 of mental healthcare act, 2017 states that person attempting suicide in severe stress than such person cannot be held liable under 309 of IPC.