Article of the Week

The Issue of Insanity

TAs Pravin Mahajan's lawyer cries insanity, legal experts are of the opinion that this line of defence will not hold - on various grounds. "There are many cases where the defendant pleads insanity but not many are sustainable," says prominent defence lawyer Shrikant Shivade. And this, he says, is because in India and in other countries, the onus of proving insanity is governed by the principles of the M'Naughten rule, laid down by the House of Lords.

According to M’Naughten, to establish a defence on grounds of insanity, it must be clearly proved that at the time of committing an act the accused was labouring under such a defect of reason so as to not know the nature and quality of his act, or if he did know it, he did not know that he was doing wrong.

According to the IPC, “nothing is an offence that is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature if the act, or that he is doing what is either or contrary to law”.

Does this rule apply to Pravin?

“The M’Naughten principles wouldn’t be applicable in Pravin’s case for the simple reason that the four major points - absence of motive, premeditation and secrecy and want of accomplices are destroyed by the acts committed after and before the incident”, says lawyer Shyam Keswani.

Pravin’s surrender clearly shows that he realized what he’d done. The secrecy principle, too, isn’t maintainable as “he was carrying a weapon, which shows he’d planned the shooting”.

Type of Insanity

Insanity can either be legal or medical. Legal insanity requires a defendant to able to understand the trial process. People who do not understand the nature of the charges or functioning of the legal system are considered unfit for trial. If mental illness has a direct on a given criminal act, an individual can be found legally insane. Medical insanity requires a person to be unable to differentiate between right and wrong at the time of the crime. This inability must be the direct result of a mental disease/defect.

“Pravin doesn’t come under either category. His statement to the police states his brother ill-treated him because of which he took the extreme step. This means he knew what he was doing, which excludes him from legal insanity. Neither is he medically insane as there are no records of his undergoing treatment for mental illness,” Shivade says.

The Bail factor

In most cases, accuses who plead insanity are put behind bars as they are seen as a threat to society. "Pravin's is an open and shut case. The police have material evidence against him. However, Pramod's statement would be crucial as he is the only eyewitness. He alone can can tell if it is a case of misfiring or with knowledge. As of now, Pravin, by adopting the insanity defence, is like a drowning man clutching at a straw, knowing he is going to drown," says Keswani

Source: Statement shows otherwise. Hindustan Times, 24th April 2006.