Section 108: Abetment of Suicide

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita • Chapter VI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body • Official Statutory Text & Legal Guide

Chapter VI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body
Court of Session
Non-Bailable
Cognizable
Formerly Sec 306 IPC

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 108

Section 108 penalizes Abetment of Suicide, requiring proof of direct, active instigation or proximate incitement driving the deceased to take their life.

  • Abetment of Suicide Offence: Section 108 (formerly Section 306 IPC) provides that if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term extending up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
  • Mens Rea & Active Incitement: Liability requires direct, active instigation or intentional facilitation leading to the suicide; mere harassment without proximal instigation does not satisfy the statutory threshold.

Section 108 enforces strict evidentiary thresholds for abetment of suicide, requiring clear proof of intentional provocation or positive acts directly leading to the fatal outcome.

To sustain a conviction, the prosecution must prove positive acts of instigation or intentional facilitation under Section 45. The act of the accused must be proximate to the suicide and leave the deceased with no other option.

Key Landmark Precedents:
  • M. Mohan v. State (2011) 3 SCC 626: Held that abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC / Section 108 BNS requires a clear mens rea and an active act or direct incitement leading the deceased to commit suicide; hyper-sensitivity of the victim cannot create liability.
  • Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan (2021) 19 SCC 144: Held that a school teacher reprimanding a student for discipline does not amount to abetment of suicide, quashing criminal proceedings.
Legal Commentary:

Section 108 is heavily litigated in suicide cases involving workplace harassment, marital discord, and financial debt. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that ordinary workplace reprimands, domestic quarrels, or demands for loan repayment do not constitute abetment unless continuous torture intended to cause suicide is established.