Introduction:
The Indian Penal code shows the safeguard of insanity under Section 84. “Act of a person of unsound mind.—Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.” CrPC shows with person accused who is of unsound mind in under Sections 328 to 338. Mental disorder is a term for insanity.
People with mental disabilities are considered ineligible to stand trial. The wife of a mentally ill person may ask for a divorce on grounds of insanity. If there is sufficient evidence that the testator had a mental illness, she may contest the will. Transmission by a mentally ill person in guardianship is negligible.
Keywords: Insanity, Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure code, lunatic, unsound mind.
Meaning:
Lunatic is an a term referring to a person who is seen as mentally ill, dangerous, foolish, or crazy conditions once attributed to “lunacy”.
SECTION 328-Procedure in case of accused being lunatic.
The civil surgeon or medical officer who is shall be witness in the case and have to be written. In case, the accused is found to unsound he shall be sent to clinical psychologist until he become of sound. The magistrate shall postpone the proceeding until the person’s unsoundness is remedied, based on medical proof.
In the case of Mohan Lal @ Ranjan Mohan Bhatnagar vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) (2011), it was alleged that there was evidence that the appellant was examined by various doctors before the start of the trial by the Metropolitan Magistrate, who learned in the framework of the procedure under Article 328 of the Criminal Procedure Code was found to be unsound. It was declared mentally ill and M.M. It was also ordered to this effect, and the trial did not begin until he was found to be mentally sound.
SECTION 329. Procedure in case of person of unsound mind tried before Court.
During the trial, the magistrate satisfies that the accused is unsound, mentally ill, etc, and incapable to defend himself. The magistrate shall evaluate about the lunacy of accused by a civil surgeon or medical officer by State Government. If the accused cannot defend himself, the magistrate will hear the prosecution and examine the records. The fact of insanity throughout the trial will be considered part of the proceedings.
In the case of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Haryana (2011), The application was filed during the trial and was thought to be relevant because Article 329 of the Criminal Procedure Code concerns the trial of persons with mental disabilities.
SECTION 330. Release of person of unsound mind pending investigation or trial.
During the investigation or trail, the acussed is found unsound or incapable (Sec 328 and sec 329) to defend himself. In case of bailable and in case of non bailable nature of crime, the magistrate shall release him, but in the case no release the accused must be held in a facility where he may get medical attention.
In State of Karnataka v. Jatli 1992 Cr Lj 3835, the accused attacked his wife and children and set the house on fire. A judge can decide this matter only after reviewing the evidence provided by a medical professional. Without such medical evidence in the case, the judge cannot make any decision.
SECTION 331. Resumption of inquiry or trial.
If the hearing or trial is postponed or suspended due to a mentally ill person or a person incapable of defence, the magistrate judge shall summon the accused and resume the hearing or trial when the accused has come to his senses or is not in his right mind.
In the case of Subhash Bhardwaj v. State (2016), the court concluded that a trial would be scheduled after the trial court received the IHBAS report and completed its investigation under Section 331 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
SECTION 332. Procedure on accused appearing before Magistrate or Court.
The accused appearing before the Magistrate or court for the inquiry or trail as he or she regains mental soundness or ceases to be insane. The provisions of Section 330 will once again be applicable if the individual is still unable to recover from his condition.
In the case of Geeg Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2008), the accused was held to be able to submit his defence, so the court ruled that the trial will continue.
SECTION 333. When accused appears to have been of sound mind.
When the accused appears in every way a sane person. If the accused, under the watchful eye of a magistrate or court, has a reputation for being sane at the time of the investigation or pursuit, the evidence produced confirms that the accused presented the evidence. Then, if the accused is of sound mind at this point in the commission’s time, the magistrate will either proceed with the case or send it to the judge when the law requires it.
In the case of Dimple Dimpu Gurcharan v. State of Punjab (2008), the court said the applicant was deemed to have suffered from this form of insanity when he committed the crime, which could render the nature and quality of his conduct unrecognizable when he committed the same. No. 333 comes into effect play.
SECTION 334. Judgment of acquittal on ground of unsoundness of mind.
Whenever a magistrate believes that the accused is sound, and when satisfactory evidence is presented to the court that the act would be a crime if it was committed by an accused, the magistrate may proceed with the case
In Gurjit Singh v. State of Punjab 1986 Cr. Lj 1505(P&H) agreed that there must be sufficient medical evidence to prove and assert that you are insane. Proceeding the trial without recording the results may invalidate the trial.
SECTION 335. Person acquitted on such ground to be detained in safe custody.
This section discusses that when a person is released by the court, they should request that the accused be kept in a safe place or kept with a colleague’s representative. The court may extradite the accused if the accused’s partner files an application with the court and guarantees the court the safety and protection of the accused.
In the case of Niman Sha v. State of M.P. (1995), the court stated that, on the basis of the heinous crimes committed by the accused and his mental state and danger to society, the accused would be imprisoned in the mentioned Institute of Mental Health in Gwalior until he returned to normal after treatment. .
SECTION 337. Procedure where lunatic prisoner is reported capable of making his defence.
If the accused appears to be fit and in the capacity of defending himself, then the Court can proceed according to the procedure mentioned under Section 332 of Cr.P.C
In the case of Emperor v. Motilal Hiralal (1921), the Court continued the trial as the accused is capable of defending himself.
SECTION 338. Procedure where lunatic detained is declared fit to be released.
The accused has been taken into custody, but now he will not harm others or himself. The accused must be released, and even the state can order him released or transferred to a state psychiatric hospital.
In the case of Motiram Maroti Dhule v. State of Maharashtra (2002), the court ordered the applicant to be detained in Amravati prison for the time being until the state government takes action on the matter. The state may, in some cases, determine where the appellant must remain without action under sections 338 or 339 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
SECTION 339. Delivery of lunatic to care of relative or friend.
A family member or friend applies for custody of the accused person under Section 330 or Section 335.
The accused should be kept safe and cared, he should be no harm to himself or others. The member or friend must bring accused in for questioning or examination whenever the state requires it.
In case of detention under section 330, the accused shall be referred to a magistrate or court if necessary.
In the case of Geeg Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2008), the Court has said that as per CrPC, the State Government may make suitable directions to deliver the appellant to any of his relatives or friends when he is fit.
Conclusion:
The provision under chapter XXV Section 328 to 339 of Criminal procedural code, about the accused when of unsound mind and not capable to make his defence. The magistrate shall evaluate the accused on the medical report and has authority to postpone such trail or release the unsound mind person. The person shall be in a safe custody of family or friend if an application is made to court. In case of denial of bail he shall be under the custody of safe care.
After the accused recovers his mental state shall be summoned to the court and proceed with the trail and state the nature of crime. The provision complies all the necessary conditions for an unsound mind, mentally ill person to achieve proper justice.
This article is written by Komal Andhale, Nawalmal Firodia Law College PUNE, 1st Year, LLM.
