SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Del) 145

STATE – Appellant
Versus
SANJAY KUMAR BHATIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K.Nasim, R.P.Lao

Rajinder Sachar, J.

( 1 ) WE have explained in connected case Crl. R. 126/84 the law and have sent back the cases for trial. Though we held that the view of law taken by the Magistrate is erroneous we do not intend sending back this matter for trial. The reason is that this is a charge sheet for attempting to commit suicide under Section 309 Indian Penal Code A young man has allegedly tried to commit suicide presumably because of over emotionalism. It is ironic that Section 309 Indian Penal Code still continues to be on our Penal Code. The result is that a young boy driven to such frustration so as to seek one s own life would have escaped human punishment if he had succeeded but is to be bounded by the police, because attempt has failed. Strange paradox that in the age of votaries of Euthanasia, suicide should be criminally punishable. Instead of the society hanging its head in shame that there should be such social strains that a young man (the hope of tomorrow, should be driven to suicide compounds its inadequacy by treating the boy as a criminal. Instead of sending the young boy to psychiatric clinic it gleefully sends him to mengle with criminals, as if trying its best to see


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top