Back
Rebukes States for Flawed Affidavit on Mental Healthcare Rules
The has taken a stern view of the incomplete implementation of the , by the states of Punjab and Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh. In a filed by , a Division Bench comprising
Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra
and
Justice Rohit Kapoor
criticized an affidavit filed by the
Chief Secretary of Punjab
as being
"
"
and directed the states to ensure all institutions under the Act are functional.
Affidavit 'In the Teeth' of the Law
The Court examined an affidavit from Punjab's Chief Secretary explaining why the rules under the Mental Healthcare Act had not been notified. The affidavit claimed that while the had approved the rules, they could not be notified because they still needed to be placed before the Legislature. The Bench, however, found this reasoning fundamentally flawed.
Citing
Section 121(2)
of the Act, the Court observed that the provision
"clearly manifests that after obtaining of approval from the
, the rule would have to be notified and thereafter the rule so made shall be placed before the appropriate Legislature."
The statutory sequence requires notification first, with legislative placement to follow—not the reverse, as the affidavit suggested.
"It is, therefore, that the affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary is
,"
the Court held.
Counsel for the State of Punjab did not dispute this legal position and sought a week's deferment to take necessary steps.
and Lack of Sensitivity
The PIL concerns the implementation of the , which came into force on .
Section 45
of the Act mandates every State Government to establish a
within nine months of the Act receiving Presidential assent. The Court noted that while certain steps had been taken,
"its provisions have not been implemented
, as the formation of State Authority in terms of Section 45 has remained a matter of
."
Emphasising the significance of the legislation, the Bench stated:
"We reiterate that due sensitivity on the part of the officials of the State would be required for implementing the provisions incorporated in the
. We expect the State authorities to be more careful in ensuring compliance of the Legislation."
Annual Reports and Functional Institutions Required
The Court noted that had already been constituted in both Punjab and Haryana. It directed the concerned authorities of both states to produce on record the annual reports of these Authorities, as required under Section 64 of the Act. The was directed to ensure that its is constituted within four weeks from the date of the order.
The Bench further directed the States of Punjab and Haryana, as well as the
,
"to ensure that all necessary institutions contemplated under the Act are made functional, so that the authorities constituted thereunder are able to effectively discharge the
cast upon them and ensure availability of effective mental healthcare to the citizens."
The matter has been listed for further hearing on .
