The law on abetment to suicide has been instrumental in curbing larger societal problems such as dowry deaths.
Last week, in an important ruling, the Supreme Court tightened the law on how a case of abetment to suicide can be made against an individual, specifically in the workplace. The Court’s clarification was much needed given that the pressures of a workplace, especially under the glare of social media, makes this an increasingly grey area.
In a short ruling by a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, the Supreme Court overturned the Allahabad High Court’s decision to allow a trial in a case where a 60-year-old employee had died by suicide. The family of the employee attributed it to pressure from senior management to accept voluntary retirement. Apart from the FIR by the brother of the deceased, two statements by co-workers spelt out the allegation. However, like in several such cases, the law tests the line between a stressful workplace and criminal intent to push someone to commit suicide. The SC rightly drew a crucial distinction between relationships in the personal space and the workplace when determining what constitutes abetment. “In normal circumstances, relationships by sentimental tie cannot be equated with the official relationship. The reason being different nature of conduct to maintain that relationship. The former category leaves more expectations, whereas in the latter category, by and large, the expectations and obligations are prescribed by law, rules, policies and regulations,” said the ruling.
The law on abetment to suicide has been instrumental in curbing larger societal problems such as dowry deaths. The penal provision — Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, that has been retained in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — carries a jail term of up to 10 years. However, its misuse is also rampant. Even as workplaces are evolving to focus on the mental health and well-being of employees, the threat of criminal law is concerning. For example, mere utterances by the accused or a mention of an accused in the FIR or suicide note, cannot in themselves constitute grounds for a case. The police, and even the courts, defer a fair reading of the allegation to a trial since it involves ascertaining the intent of the accused. The SC ruling wisely cautions against the trend of taking allegations at face value. “The test that the Court should adopt in this type of cases is to make an endeavour to ascertain on the basis of the materials on record whether there is anything to indicate even prima facie that the accused intended the consequences of the act, i.e., suicide,” the court said.
