Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
Banothu Bharathi @ Lasya @ Bujji – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana, rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad – Respondent
Question 1? Question 2? Question 3?
Key Points: - The appellate court considers Section 84 IPC to acquit due to mental illness (paranoid schizophrenia) at time of offence. (!) (!) (!) - It analyzes whether conviction under Section 302 IPC can be sustained given mental illness and need for Section 84 inquiry and proper psychiatric/CrPC procedure. (!) (!) (!) - It directs acquittal and transfer to mental health facility, applying Section 335 Cr.P.C. and Section 103 MHA 2017, and revises sentencing/remedies accordingly. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman)
Heard Mrs. Monica P. Pole, learned counsel for appellant - accused and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.
2. Vide judgment dated 07.04. 2025 in Sessions Case No.397 of 2022, learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Suryapet (hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’), found the appellant - accused guilty of the offence under Section - 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and accordingly imposed death penalty on her.
3. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and death sentence imposed by learned trial Court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.547 of 2025 , while learned trial Court addressed a letter vide Dis.No.220 of , dated 07.05. to this Court seeking confirmation of death penalty under Section - 366 (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’). Pursuant to the said letter, this Court registered the same as Referred Trial (R.T.) No.2 of .
4. The case of the prosecution is as follows:
i) The accused - Banothu Barathi @ Lasya @ Bujji is well educated as she studied B.Sc., B.Ed. Her parents are financiall
The appellant's actions resulted from paranoid schizophrenia, rendering her incapable of understanding the nature of her act, thus entitling her to acquittal under Section 84 of IPC.
An accused can be exonerated if not aware of wrongfulness due to unsoundness of mind, requiring examination of circumstantial behavior surrounding the crime.
The absence of a clear motive does not negate a murder conviction, and the defence of insanity requires proof of incapacity to understand the nature of the act, which was not established.
If accused was not able to establish conclusively that he was insane at time he committed offence, evidence placed before Court by accused or by prosecution may raise a reasonable doubt in mind of Co....
The accused failed to prove unsoundness of mind at the time of the offence, and motive loses significance in cases based on direct evidence of eye-witnesses.
(1) Murder – If motive is proved, that would supply another link in chain of circumstantial evidence but, absence of motive cannot be a ground to reject prosecution case, though absence of motive is ....
Point of Law : Once, a person is found to be suffering from mental disorder or mental deficiency, which takes within its ambit hallucinations, dementia, loss of memory and self-control, at all releva....
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
