Abetment of Suicide

Abetment of Suicide

Context:

Recently, the Supreme Court delivered a judgement on abetment of suicide in the workplace. The court made it clear that unnecessary prosecutions related to workplace suicides should be avoided, ensuring that only genuine cases see the light of justice.

Relevance:

GS-02 (Indian Polity)

 

Case Background

  • A salesman named Rajeev Jain who had been working in a company for over 23 years, after facing frequent pressure from his seniors to accept a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS), commits suicide.
  • Jain’s brother filed a case against the senior officers, accusing them of abetment of suicide.
  • Initially, the officers approached the Allahabad High Court to have the case quashed. However, the court found enough grounds to further examine whether the actions of the senior officers played a direct role in Jain’s death.

 

What is Abetment of Suicide?

  • Abetment of suicide is when someone is encouraged or provoked or forced to take their own life.
  • According to Section 306 of the IPC and Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, abetment requires clear proof of intent. Which means that there has to be evidence that someone actively incited or conspired to push another person toward suicide.
  • Abetment of suicide is a serious offense and is non-bailable and the accused can be arrested without a warrant.
  • It’s also a non-compoundable offence, meaning the case can’t be settled or withdrawn even if the parties come to an agreement.

The Supreme Court’s Stand

  • The Supreme Court held that not every instance of workplace harassment leads to abetment of suicide.
  • It also stated that emotional conflicts or job stress alone do not suffice for such charges and there has to be solid evidence that the victim was intentionally provoked or pushed into feeling like suicide was their only way out.

Conclusion:

The ruling sends a strong message that it is important to protect individuals from severe mistreatment at work and also ensure that the law is not misused in situations where mental health complexities come into play.