CISF Officer Who Shot Herself Amid Infertility Distress Discharged As Karnataka HC Says Section 115 Bars Trial While Severe-Stress Presumption Stands

The petitioner, a CISF Sub-Inspector, allegedly fired a round from her service pistol into her abdomen while on duty on 12 October 2022.

She survived, underwent major surgery and was later charged under Section 309 of the IPC.

She sought discharge under Section 239 of the CrPC read with Section 115 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (“MHC Act”), but the JMFC dismissed her application on 26 December 2024.

Before the High Court, she relied on her history of infertility and unsuccessful IVF treatment as context for the severe distress underlying the attempt.

She challenged the JMFC’s order and sought quashing of the proceedings.

Section 309 of the IPC criminalises an attempt to commit suicide.

Section 115(1) of the MHC Act provides that a person who attempts suicide is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have severe stress and “shall not be tried and punished” under the IPC; the prosecution bears the burden of rebutting that presumption.

The provision does not repeal Section 309, but displaces its operation where the presumption remains unrebutted.

Section 115(2) requires the appropriate Government to provide care, treatment and rehabilitation.

Section 239 of the CrPC requires discharge where, after considering the police report and accompanying material, the charge is groundless; in a Section 309 prosecution, the Magistrate must assess that material in light of Section 115 and cannot shift the burden to the accused.

The Court also relied on the approach in *Manoj Kumar v. State of Karnataka* and referred to *Common Cause v. Union of India* and *Simi C.N. v. State of Kerala* in discussing Section 115’s protective purpose.

The alleged act was an attempt by the petitioner to take her own life, bringing Section 115 into operation.

The prosecution material did not rebut the presumption of severe stress.

The petitioner’s infertility, unsuccessful treatment and the fact that she shot herself in the abdomen—an area she associated with her inability to conceive—were consistent with her explanation of personal distress.

Her use of a service firearm while on duty was relevant but, without more, did not rebut the statutory presumption; the material did not indicate that she intended to threaten or harm anyone else.

Because the JMFC failed to consider Section 115 or assess whether the prosecution material rebutted its presumption, the charge could not stand.

It further held that the presumption must be considered during investigation and at the discharge stage.

The criminal petition was allowed; the JMFC’s order was set aside, the petitioner’s discharge application was allowed, and she was discharged from the Section 309 IPC offence in C.C. No. 2422 of 2023.

The Court also directed that a copy of the order be sent to specified security and police authorities for their information and consideration regarding personnel mental-health and welfare measures.