The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a detailed inquiry into the mental condition of the accused and the need for recording reasons and preparing a memorandum when determining the accused's capability of making a defense.

H.K.K. Singh and B. Lamare, JJ.

1. This is a reference made by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court, Manipur East), at Imphal under Section 366 of Cr.P.C. in respect of sentence of death passed by the Court in Sessions Trial No. 19/ME/IE/1985/401985/1/2002/6/2002 against the accused Saikhom Ramo Singh.

2. As the convicted accused is undefended the Court appointed Mr. N. Ibotombi Singh as Amicus Curiae for the defence of the accused convicted.

3. We have heard Mr. Jalal Uddin, learned P.P. for the State and also Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned Amicus Curiae.

4. At the outset, the learned Amicus Curiae has clearly stated that no appeal has been preferred by the accused convict mainly because of the fact that the procedure adopted by the learned Trial Court in conducting, the trial involving the accused who was suffering from unsoundness of mind is not in accordance with the provisions contemplated under Chapter XXV of Cr.P.C. To highlight his submission the learned Amicus Curiae has taken us to the record of the Trial Court convicting the accused under Section 302 I.P.C. and awarding the death sentence.

5. On perusal of the record of the Trial Court it is found that a situation arose at the commencement of the trial thus it becomes unnecessary for the Court to decide regarding the mental condition of the accused to find out as to whether the accused was of unsound mind and consequently incapable of making his defence. Thus, the accused was caused to be examined by an expert. And the Doctor after examing the accused submitted his report (Exbt. C/1). Thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge examined the said Doctor, namely Dr. L. Priyokumar Singh as Court witness No. 1 on 28.8.1985 and the Doctor gave his opinion that accused was of unsound mind. Thereafter the learned Sessions Judge made further inquiry and came to the conclusion that the conclusion that the accused was incapable of making his defence. Thus, the trail was suspended. Again on 30.8.1985 the learned Sessions Judge passed necessary orders for treatment of the accused in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 330 of the Cr.P.C. on 6.12.1999 the learned Sessions Judge again reiterated the earlier decision that the accused was of unsound mind and consequently incapable of making his defence and as such the Court gave direction to the authorities to take proper steps in accordance with the provisions either under Section 338 or 339 Cr.P.C. on 1.3.2000, on the prayer of the Addl. Superintendent of Central Jail, Sajiwa the trail Judge passed an order thereby allowing the accused to be taken outside Manipur in a properly equipped mental hospital for treatment. Again, by that order also the learned Sessions Judge directed the authorities concerned to inform the guardian/relatives of the accused.

6. On 20.6.2000 the learned Judge again directed that the accused be kept in a psychiatric hospital or a psychiatric nursing home established under the Mental Health Act. And thereafter again on 21.3.2001 the learned Sessions Judge recorded that the trial of the accused should not be proceeded as he was of unsound mind and as such incapable of making his defence and the learned Judge passed specific order to put up the case on receipt of any report from the authorities about the mental condition of the accused.

7. On 13.2.2002 the case was transferred to the Fast Track Court and on 18.2.2002 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court recorded that the case should be taken up under Section 331Cr.P.C. on receipt of the report under Section 337 from the concerned authority.

8. It appears that in the meantime a letter being No. 5/33/98-CJS(Pt) 348 dated 29.5.2002 of the Addl. Supdt. Central Jail, Sajiwa alongwith the copy of the medical treatment report of the Medical Superintendent, RINPAS, Kanke, Ranchi-6 was received and accordingly the case was put up on 3.6.2002. And on 3.6.2002 the learned Sessions Judge recorded that the aforesaid letter alongwith the cop