The Madras High Court holds that merely sitting on strike will not attract offence attempt to suicide under section 309 of the IPC.

The High Court of Madras allowed a criminal petition under section 482 of the Cr. PC filed for quashing proceedings initiated under section 309 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts leading to the filing of the FIR are that the petitioner was detained at the Special Camp, Poonamallee. A protest was made by the petitioner and others by way of a hunger strike from 15.08.2013 to 24.08.2013. Based on the same, an F.I.R. came to be registered for an offence under Section 309 IPC on the ground that there was an attempt to commit suicide. On completion of the investigation, a final report was filed before the Court below and the Court below took cognizance of the final report. 
 
The Petitioner challenged the proceedings before the High Court which held thus: 
 
“The mere fact that the petitioner has protested by sitting on hunger strike will not attract the offence under Section 309 IPC. Even if the materials available on record are taken as it is, it does not constitute an offence under Section 309 IPC. That apart, the Court below ought to have taken cognizance within a period of one year since the offence is punishable for a maximum period of one year. However, the Court below has taken cognizance after nearly three years without assigning any reasons. Therefore, taking cognizance of the final report by the Court below is barred by law and stands vitiated.” 

P. Chandrakumar vs. State & Anr.