Back
AMRITA SINHA
Akhil Bandhu Saha – Appellant
Versus
Member Secretary, State Legal Services Authority – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 11th December, 2018 issued by the Member Secretary, State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal (‘SLSA’ for short) whereby the petitioner was referred for psychiatric treatment on the ground that he was found to be showing strong symptoms of mental illness.
The petitioner claims that he is entitled to free legal aid under Article 39A of the Constitution and according to the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
Though initially free legal aid was provided to the petitioner by the State Legal Services Authority, but in November, 2018 the petitioner was communicated the show cause dated 11th November, 2015 passed by the Registrar cum Deputy Secretary, SLSA, West Bengal to as to why the legal aid rendered to him shall not be withdrawn.
The petitioner by a communication dated 15th November, 2018 submitted his reply to the show cause before SLSA. Upon consideration of his reply, the Member Secretary, SLSA passed the impugned order.
The petitioner submits that the order dated 11th December, 2018 is without jurisdiction. The Member Secretary, SLSA does not have the jurisdiction to come to any finding about the mental health of a person. T
Offensive communications do not necessarily indicate mental illness, and financial distress and frustration can be considered as reasons for offensive behavior.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of referring proof of mental illness for further scrutiny to the concerned Board under Section 105 of the Mental Healthcare Ac....
The need for considering incapacitation due to mental illness and providing an opportunity of hearing in dismissal cases.
Point of Law : Section 105 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 deals with procedure to be followed in a judicial process where any proof of mental illness of a person is produced.
Section 105 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 is a protective mechanism for persons with mental illness, not invocable by litigants to challenge adversary's capacity in ongoing civil disputes; requires ....
The central legal point established is the requirement to consider the mental condition of the petitioner, comply with medical examination requirements, and adhere to principles of natural justice in....
The court mandated adherence to mental health evaluation procedures for defendants deemed unfit to stand trial, emphasizing statutory compliance with mental health laws.
Point of Law : Ss. 54 reproduced as application for judicial inquisition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
