Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1972 Supreme(Mad) 470

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.M. Shelat, Ag. C.J., I.D. Dua and H.R. Khanna, JJ.
Dr. Jai Shankar (Lunatic) through Vijay Shankar brother, guardian
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh
Crl. A. No. 279 of 1971.
Decided On : 30 August 1972

R.L. Kohli, Advocate, for Appellant.
V.B. Mahajan and R.K Sachthey, Advocates, for Respondent.

A magistrate is required to hold an inquiry under section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code to determine whether there are reasons to believe that an accused person is suffering from mental infirmity before proceeding with the committal proceedings.

Headnote:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1898 - SECTION 464 - MENTAL INFIRMITY OF ACCUSED - INQUIRY - PROCEDURE - INTERPRETATION OF ORDER DIRECTING EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED BY HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES - SCOPE OF MAGISTRATE'S DISCRETION - BURDEN OF PROOF ON ACCUSED.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant was charged with murder and was arrested. His advocate applied to the magistrate for a medical check-up, citing instances of abnormal behavior and medical certificates suggesting unsoundness of mind. The magistrate rejected the application, relying on the appellant's responses to questions and his application for remitting money seized by the police. The appellant filed a revision application before the sessions judge, which was dismissed. The high court ordered the appellant to be examined by the Snowdon Hospital, but the hospital reported that it lacked the facilities for a proper examination and recommended admission to a mental hospital. The magistrate proceeded with the committal proceedings without waiting for the high court's order on a review application and committed the appellant to the sessions court for trial.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the magistrate failed to make the necessary inquiry under section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code to determine whether there were reasons to believe that the appellant was suffering from mental infirmity. The court interpreted the high court's order directing the examination of the appellant by the Snowdon Hospital as requiring the hospital to keep the appellant under observation and come to a definite opinion on his mental state. The court found that the magistrate had misunderstood the high court's order and proceeded with the committal proceedings without first determining whether there were reasons to believe that the appellant was suffering from mental infirmity.
Issues: 1. Whether the magistrate conducted a proper inquiry under section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code to determine whether there were reasons to believe that the appellant was suffering from mental infirmity? 2. Whether the high court's order directing the examination of the appellant by the Snowdon Hospital required the hospital to keep the appellant under observation and come to a definite opinion on his mental state?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code requires the magistrate to hold an inquiry into the fact of unsoundness of mind of an accused person if the magistrate has reason to believe that the accused is suffering from such infirmity. The burden is on the accused to establish that he is suffering from unsoundness of mind. 2. The high court's order directing the examination of the appellant by the Snowdon Hospital was intended to ensure that the appellant received a proper examination and that a definite opinion could be formed on his mental state. The magistrate was required to consider the report of the hospital authorities before proceeding with the committal proceedings.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the high court's order and the committal order passed by the magistrate, and directed a de novo committal proceeding in compliance with the requirements of section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Shelat, Ag. C.J.:-The appellant was eharged with having committed on 24th April, 1970 the murder of a lady doctor, Dr. Vaidya, at Kulu.On 4th May, 1970 he was arrested on the aforesaid allegation. On 9th May, 1970, his Advocate made an application before the Magistrate, Kulu, under section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The application stated that the Advocate had interviewed the appellant in the judicial lock-up where he was detained and found him talking incoherently and showing symptoms of impairment of the cognitive faculties of mind and otherwise of an abnormal behaviour. The applicant prayed that he should be removed to the mental hospital at Amitsar for ascertaining whether be was in a position to make his defence. Since there was no response to the said application, a similar application was again addressed to the Magistrate on 3rd June, 1970. To this application were annexed three medical certificates by Dr. B.N. Sur, Dr. Pathak and Dr. K.P. Singh respectively dated 10th May, 1970, 15th May, 1970 and 9th May, 1970, all the three certifying that even as a medical student the appellant had shown signs suggesting unsoundness of mind. In the meantime the case was transferred to the Court of the District Magistrate, Bilaspur. On nth September, 1970 the appellant’s Advocate once again filed an application for medical check up setting; out therein various instances displaying abnormal and strange conduct on the part of the appellant right from his student days, as also during the proceedings in the Court on 31st August, 1970 when the appellant, amongst other things, proclaimed that he was Lord Vishnu and the ruler of Delhi. By his order dated 23rd September, 1970, the Magistrate rejected the application stating that he had no reasons to doubt the appellant’s sanity and decided to proceed with the committal proceedings. In this order the Magistrate cited an application made by the appellant on 26th July, 1970, for remitting to his mother the money seized by the Police from his person at the time of his arrest, as also his replies to the questions put to him if copies of documents relied on by the prosecution were supplied to him under section 173 of the Code. This was done with a view to show that the appellant understood the proceedings and their nature. Against this order a revision application was filed before the Sessions Judge. That was dismissed by an order dated 30th November, 1970. A further revision against that dismissal was then filed before the High Court.

2. By his order dated 23rd December, 1970, Rangarajan, J., ordered that “the larger interests of Justice require that the accused should be examined for bis mental condition and that such an inquiry should not in all fairness, and in order to be directly useful, be still further delayed”. The learned Judge directed that the appellant should be produced before the Medical Superinsendent, Snowdon Hospital, Simla, for his examination by a competent doctor or doctors by keeping him in observation for such time as might be considered necessary. He further directed that the Superintendent should forward a report of the result of such examination to the committing Magistrate “who will act according to law in the light of such report”.

3. Pursuant to the said order, the Superintendent of Snowdon Hospital sent his report dated 7th January, 1971, to the Magistrate stating that the appellant had been examined by Dr. V. K. Mudgil, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Himachal Pradesh Medical College and Hospital, who reported that from a mere examination of the appellant in Psychiatric out - patient department it was difficult to give an opinion on the appellant’s mental condition, and therefore, recommended that he should be sent to some mental hospital for observation. To an inquiry by the Magistrate, dated 11th January, 1971, the Snowdon Hospital authorities replied on 19th January, 1971, that the hospital had no provision for admission as in-door patient and c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1972 Supreme(Mad) 470

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAJ.M. Shelat, Ag. C.J., I.D. Dua and H.R. Khanna, JJ.Dr. Jai Shankar (Lunatic) through Vijay Shankar brother, guardianVersusState of Himachal PradeshCrl. A. No. 279 of 1971.Decided On : 30 August 1972

A magistrate is required to hold an inquiry under section 464 of the Criminal Procedure Code to determine whether there are reasons to believe that an accused person is suffering from mental infirmity before proceeding with the committal proceedings.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.M. Shelat, Ag. C.J., I.D. Dua and H.R. Khanna, JJ.
Dr. Jai Shankar (Lunatic) through Vijay Shankar brother, guardian
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh
Crl. A. No. 279 of 1971.
Decided On : 30 August 1972