Related Provisions of Indian Laws:-
Article 14 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution are the main concern under this case. These articles talks about the right to equality and right to life and liberty respectively.
This case primarily deals with the Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (offence of abetment of suicide).
Section 309 of the IPC, that provides if anyone survives of an attempt to suicide that will be held guilty of punishment.
FACTS OF GIAN KAUR vs. STATE OF PUNJAB CASE:
Gian kaur and Harbans Singh (both are husband and wife) abeted their daughter-in-law to suicide.
Both were found guilty under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code by the "Trial Court".
The court punished them with the rigorous imprisonment of six years with 2000 rupees fine and if they fails to pay the amount "nine months" imprisonment will be extended.
Gian kaur filed an appeal in the High Court then the hon'ble court reduced the imprisonment from six years to three years.
The verdict in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab:
The court ruled that because it is against God's will or nature, the "right to die" and the "right to kill" are not included in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees "right to life and personal liberty." Death is not something that anyone has the authority to delay. Therefore, Articles 21 and 14 are not violated by Section 309 of the IPC. It is therefore legitimate under the constitution.
If Section 306 is genuine, then no Indian citizen may be penalized for attempting suicide; nevertheless, if someone is encouraging another person to commit suicide, they will be punished in the best interests of society. As a result, the court's decision in P. Rathinam v. UOI was overturned, affirming the constitutionality of sections 306 and 309 of the IPC and holding both appellants accountable for aiding and abetting suicide.
CASES REFERRED:
CONCLUSION OF GIAN KAUR CASE:
There are in total 6 fundamental rights available right now in the constitutional. Whereas traditionally there were seven and through 42nd conctitutional amendment act "right to prperty" fundamental right was excluded from part 3 of the constitution. Now this right situated in article 300 as a legal right.
But this case also looked upon the two important fundamental rights which are article 14 and 21. This was stated in this judgement that under article 21, no person has a right to end his or her life.
That is why "Attempt to suicide" considered as a punishable offence and the punishment is given under Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1980 (Now it changed into Bharatiya Niyayi Sanhita 'BNS'). Life is a gift by the god which can not be taken by himself, otherwise it would be against the nature or god's will.
Henc, No person can take her or his own life and no abetting of suicide allowed, it is also punishable under the law in india.
