Beyond Malice: Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Prosecution Due to Petitioner’s Mental Impairment

In a compassionate exercise of judicial discretion, the Bombay High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a retired professor, recognizing that an alleged act of digital harassment was the result of a severe neurodegenerative condition rather than criminal intent.

The case, adjudicated by a division bench comprising Justice Sarang V. Kotwal and Justice S. M. Modak , highlights the increasing importance of considering medical realities in criminal jurisprudence.

A Misunderstanding Born of Illness

The dispute originated in December 2022, when a former teaching colleague of the petitioner reported receiving an obscene message via WhatsApp. The respondent, initially shocked by the nature of the communication, filed an FIR under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code (stalking) and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act .

However, as the legal proceedings unfolded, the narrative shifted from one of malice to one of medical necessity. Counsel for the petitioner submitted evidence—a detailed medical report from a psychologist—confirming that the petitioner was suffering from Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD), a condition impacting executive function and social inhibition.

The Turnaround: Consent and Compassion

Upon learning of the petitioner's diagnosis, the respondent chose to withdraw her allegations. She filed an "Affidavit of consent" before the High Court, asserting that the act was entirely unintentional. She acknowledged that the petitioner, due to his deteriorating mental faculties, was unable to perceive or regulate his social behavior in that moment.

The respondent, appearing in person before the bench, reiterated her decision to withdraw, stating she held no objection to the quashing of the proceedings.

Key Observations

The Court’s ruling was anchored in the acknowledgment that the legal process should not become a tool for punishment where intent is absent due to cognitive decline. The bench notably remarked:

• "Because of mental impairment of his faculties, the Petitioner was unable to judge the right social behaviour and in that state, unintentionally sent the offending Whats-App message."
• "The Respondent No.1 is present in the Court. She has filed her ‘Affidavit of consent’ for quashing of the proceedings."
• "Since the Respondent No.1 herself is convinced that it was because of the Petitioner’s mental illness, this message was sent, no purpose will be served in continuing with the prosecution."

The Court’s Verdict

Finding that the continuation of the prosecution would serve no constructive purpose, the Bombay High Court ordered the quashing of C.R. No. 380 of 2022 along with the corresponding criminal case pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Girgaum, Mumbai .

This decision serves as a significant intersection between criminal law and mental health awareness. By prioritizing the factual context of the offense—specifically the medical incapacity of the accused—the Court has demonstrated its willingness to adopt a restorative and humane approach when the pursuit of justice would otherwise cause further suffering for an incapacitated party.