According to the verdict, suicide is a cardinal sin in Islam and is an anti-life act
ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Shariat Court (FSC) has declared that the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022—pertaining to the omission of the offence of attempt to commit suicide—is un-Islamic.
“After hearing the parties at length and meticulously perusing the record, we are inclined to accept Shariat Petition No 03/I/2023 and Shariat Petition No 01/I/2025.
“[We] declare that the decriminalisation of a crime through the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2022, whereby Section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) has been omitted, is against the principles of the Holy Quran and Sunnah,” stated the 26-page judgment authored by FSC judge Syed Muhammad Anwer.
According to the verdict, suicide is a cardinal sin in Islam and is an anti-life act; hence, any attempt to commit it is also considered an act promoting an anti-life act.
“Accordingly, in addition to accepting these Shariat petitions, we declare that the impugned Act, being against the Holy Quran and Sunnah, will have no legal effect immediately upon the issuance of this judgment. Consequently, Section 325 of the PPC, which was deleted through the promulgation of the impugned Act, stands restored,” it added.
A three-member FSC bench, headed by Chief Justice Iqbal Hameed ur Rehman, heard the matter.
The judgment noted that the reasons presented before parliament by the mover of the bill—that an attempt to commit suicide is carried out only by persons suffering from depression or of unsound mind, and therefore the law should be decriminalized to protect such individuals from social stigmatization—are not only flawed but also contrary to the principles of the Quran and Sunnah.
The court observed that decriminalization of the offence would allow persons of sound mind who attempt suicide to go scot-free, as the omission of Section 325 would leave no legal provision under which they could be charged.
Secondly, the order said, any person involved in instigating children or other vulnerable individuals to commit suicide would also escape prosecution under the current legal framework.
Thirdly, individuals involved in abetting suicide could not be charged or prosecuted, noting that the Holy Quran prohibits assisting one another in sinful acts. However, since the offence under Section 325 had been omitted, no legal action could be taken against those abetting or instigating such acts.
The court further observed that although the advice of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) is not binding on the government and is recommendatory in nature, it is preferable for the government to either act upon it or carefully consider it.
The judgment emphasized that under Pakistan’s constitutional scheme, the CII plays an important role in ensuring that laws conform to the principles of the Holy Quran and Sunnah, which form the grundnorm of the Constitution as reflected in Article 2A.
It said the government, as a responsible litigant, is expected to avoid unnecessary legal complications and to comply with court directions in letter and spirit, even where it has room to maneuver.
“We are of the view that such conduct by the government would be more in accordance with constitutionalism,” the judgment noted.
The order added that if the federal government seeks to protect mentally ill individuals from social stigmatization, it may consider acting upon the CII’s recommendations.
However, it stressed that decriminalizing such a serious and anti-life offence is not the solution.
Instead, the court suggested effective implementation of existing laws, such as the Mental Health Ordinance, 2001, which has since been devolved to the provinces under the 18th Amendment.
The court observed that the intensity of depression varies from case to case and cannot justify a blanket exemption. “A blanket cover cannot be given to each and every case of depression, mental illness, or disorder under which an exception may be granted for committing any crime, particularly one involving human life.”
The judgment described objections raised against the CII’s opinion as self-contradictory, noting that if procedural law already provides exemptions for mentally unsound individuals, then decriminalizing the offence altogether is not logically justified, as the act may also be committed by persons of sound mind.
“The law is made for the general public and not for exceptional segments of society. Issues relating to specific segments are addressed either through exceptions within the law or through special legislation,” the court observed.
Addressing arguments presented in parliament, the judgment stated that the claim that suicide attempts stem solely from depression or mental illness raises critical questions.
It asked whether this offence is always committed by individuals suffering from mental illness and whether such individuals are incapable of committing other crimes.
The court further questioned whether the assumption that only mentally ill persons attempt suicide justifies removing a specific offence from the Pakistan Penal Code while leaving others intact.
The judgment concluded by raising a fundamental question: if the premise is accepted that suicide attempts are always linked to mental illness, does it then mean that a person of sound mind cannot commit such an act at all.
