A trial cannot proceed against an accused who lacks the mental capacity to comprehend legal proceedings or mount a defense. Courts must prioritize the protection of natural justice and fair trial standards, and may entertain applications regarding mental incapacity even before the formal stage of framing charges.

ORDER :

An accused cannot be prosecuted under the law unless and until he is certified to be of sound mind. The Right to Fair Trial is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and no person should be condemned unheard.

A criminal trial cannot proceed against an accused who is mentally unfit, as it violates the fundamental principles of a fair trial. The accused must possess the cognitive capacity to understand the charges framed against him, follow the proceedings and put his defence.

When the accused who is being prosecuted under any law, does not possess the ability to understand the Court proceedings, and if he is not able to defend himself, he is incompetent to face trial.

If the criminal process is jeopardized then there would be no fair trial. So, to ensure a fair trial and to protect the principles of natural justice, the assessment of the accused person’s mental capacity is necessary to establish that he is able to understand the proceedings of trial and put his defence before the Court.

1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 05.12.2024, passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Sessions Trial No. 34/2024, by which the application submitted by the biological son of the accused-respondent-Puran Singh under Section 329 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the accused-respondent has been released. The Trial Court has also issued direction to the biological son of the accused-respondent to look after the accused-respondent with further directions to submit the mental fitness certificate of the accused-respondent before the Trial Court in every six months.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR No. 40/1994 was registered against the accused-respondent with the Police Station Kolari, District Dholpur wherein allegations of committing murder were levelled against him. After registration of the aforesaid FIR, the accused-respondent remained absconding for a considerable amount of time and accordingly, chargesheet under Section 299 Cr.P.C. was submitted against him in his absence. Almost 30 years after registration of the aforesaid FIR, the accused-respondent was arrested by the police on 24.01.2024 and at the relevant time, the mental condition of the accused-respondent was fit and fine and he was not suffering from any kind of mental disorder. Counsel submits that now, an application under Section 329 Cr.P.C. has been submitted by the biological son of the accused-respondent, averring that the accused-respondent is suffering from Dementia and he is not in a position to understand the trial proceedings against him and submit his defence before the Trial Court. Therefore, a prayer was made by the applicant to release the accused-respondent and hand him over to the applicant, i.e. the biological son of the accused-respondent. Counsel submits that the aforesaid application submitted by the biological son of the accused-respondent has been erroneously entertained in the light of the provisions contained under Section 329 Cr.P.C. Counsel submits that the aforesaid application was submitted at a pre-mature stage and such application can be filed when the trial commences, whereas till date, neither charges have been framed nor trial has commenced against the accused-respondent. Hence, under these circumstances, the application submitted at the instance of the accused-respondent, by his biological son, is pre-mature and not maintainable and the same should not have been considered by the Trial Court.