S. 309 IPC

Satish (Querist) 29 May 2009 This query is : Resolved
I had heard earlier that s. 309 IPC is declared as void by Supreme court. Whether it is correct?
If yes pls provide me the details of the said judgment.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Expert) 30 May 2009
AIR 1994 SUPREME COURT 1844 "P. Rathinam/Nagbhusan Patnaik v. Union of India"
= 1994 AIR SCW 1764
Coram : 2 R. M. SAHAI AND B. L. HANSARIA, JJ.
Writ Petn. (Crl.) Nos.409 of 1986 and 419 of 1987, D/- 26 -4 -1994.
P. Rathinam/Nagbhusan Patnaik, Petitioners v. Union of India and another

Message likes : 1 times

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Expert) 30 May 2009
But P rathinam case (above)has been overruled.see,AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 411 "State of Maharashtra v. Maruti Shripati Dubal"
= 1996 AIR SCW 3791
(From : 1987 Cri LJ 743 (Bombay)
Coram : 2 G. N. RAY AND G. B. PATTANAIK, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 1987, D/- 29 -8 -1996.
State of Maharashtra, Appellant v. Maruti Shripati Dubal, Respondent.
(A) Constitution of India, Art.14 and Art.21 - Penal Code (45 of 1860), S.309 - RIGHT TO LIFE - EQUALITY - S. 309 is not ultra vires Arts. 14 and 21.

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Expert) 30 May 2009
even thare is constitution bench decision of supreme court declaring that s 309 is not altravires. see,
AIR 1996 SUPREME COURT 946 "Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab"
= 1996 AIR SCW 1336
Coram : 5 J. S. VERMA, G. N. RAY, N. P. SINGH, FAIZAN UDDIN AND G. T. NANAVATI, JJ.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 274 with 167 and 279 of 1984 with 363, 364 and 365 of 1996, (arising out of S.L.P. (Cri) Nos. 2944 of 1994 with 2943 and 4193 of 1995), D/- 21 -3 -1996.
Smt. Gian Kaur, Appellant v. State of Punjab, Respondent.
WITH
Surat Lal, Appellant v. Raj Kumar and others, Respondents.
WITH
Smt. Harbans Singh and another, Appellants v. State of Punjab, Respondent.
WITH
Chandrabhushan, Appellant v. State of Maharashtra, Respondent.
WITH
Dilbagh Singh and others, Appellants v. State of H.P., Respondent. @page-SC947
AND
Lokendra Singh, Appellant v. State of M.P., Respondent.
(A) Constitution of India, Art.21 - RIGHT TO LIFE - Scope - "Right to life" - Does not include "right to die" - "Extinction of life" is not included in "protection of life" - Thus provision penalising attempt to commit suicide - Not violative of Art. 21.

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Expert) 30 May 2009
thus decision in P rathinam case declaring 309 unconstitutional, has been overruled by constitution bench decision in Gian Kaur case.