Gian Kaur vs State of Punjab || 1996 AIR 946 || Case Summary

Gian Kaur vs State of Punjab

1996 AIR 946

Case Summary

[Fundamental Rights]

[Abetment]

[Attempt to Commit Suicide]

Facts

Gian Kaur and her husband Harbans Singh were convicted by a trial court under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for abetting the suicide of Gian Kaur’s daughter-in-law, Kulwant Kaur. They challenged the conviction on the grounds that the right to life, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, inherently included the right to die. Thus, they argued, assisting suicide should not be punishable.

Issues

1. Does the "right to life" under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution encompass the "right to die"?

2. Is the abetment of suicide, as defined under Section 306 IPC, unconstitutional?

Relevant Legal Provisions

• Article 21: Ensures the protection of life and personal liberty.

• Section 306, IPC: Provides for the punishment of those who abet suicide.

• Section 309, IPC: Criminalizes attempting suicide.

Judgment

The Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment in this case, holding that the "right to life" under Article 21 does not include the "right to die" or the "right to be killed." This decision effectively overruled the earlier P. Rathinam case, which had expanded the interpretation of Article 21 to include the right to die, thereby questioning the constitutional validity of Section 309 IPC, which penalizes attempted suicide.

The Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 306 IPC, thereby affirming that abetment to suicide remains a punishable offense. The judgment drew a critical distinction between the right to life with dignity and the notion of a right to end one's life, emphasizing that these concepts are not interchangeable. The ruling underscored that while the Constitution guarantees the right to life, it does not extend to a right to terminate life.

This decision reinforced the principle that the sanctity of life is paramount, and any legal provisions that seem to contradict this principle must be interpreted in a manner that upholds the inviolable nature of life.

Rishita Vanjani