Person must be able to comprehend the proceedings

Chandregowda vs. State by Hoskote Police

Filed under: Sections 84 of the Indian Penal Code
Appellant: Chandregowda
Respondent: State by Hoskote Police
Citation: In the High Court of Karnataka
Judges: Kumar Rajaratnam and MP Chinnappa

Chandregowda filed an appeal against the order of the Sessions Court, Bangalore Rural District, convicting him for murder and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

Facts

This is a case of a father sacrificing his son, Nagendra, aged about three years to gain tantric powers. On the day of the incident, the child's grandfather went to the neighbour's house and told him that Chandregowda had locked Nagendra in a room. They broke open the door and found the child strangled to death.

When asked for the reason for killing his son, Chandregowda said that he was learning some tantric skills. The second witness went to the jurisdictional police station and reported the incident. The doctor who conducted the post mortem found the cause of death to be shock due to asphyxia. In the Trial Court, none of the witnesses supported the case.

The neighbour stated that the police came and informed him that the child was dead. He then went to the house and only then noticed the dead body of the child lying there. He further added that he did not know how the child had died. He also stated that he did not file any complaint with the police.

The grandfather stated that he went to the house and noticed that his grandchild was dead and that he did not know how he had died. He also stated that Chandregowda had not confessed to him about the crime. Chandregowda took the defence of insanity.

Three questions were asked with regard to his killing his son and then about the confession he made thereafter. He answered all the questions in the affirmative. Based on this, the Sessions Court found that there was no proof of insanity and therefore convicted him of murder. He went on appeal to the High Court of Karnataka against the order of the Sessions Court.

Observations of the Court

The Court relied on the evidence given by a psychiatrist from NIMHANS who stated that Chandregowda had appeared for the first time for treatment few months before the incident. He went to the hospital on several dates following that and later was admitted as an inpatient.

Chandregowda was suffering from advanced stage of schizophrenia and severe delusions. The Court observed that from the evidence on record that Chandregowda was suffering from a severe form of schizophrenia both immediately prior to the occurrence and after the occurrence.

On examining the evidence where Chandregowda had answered in the affirmative to the questions, the Judge opined that it was the Trial Court's duty to determine whether the person being questioned was in a position to understand the questions that were posed to him.

Held: In the light of the evidence placed before the judge, the court felt that Chandregowda should not be kept in custody, set aside the conviction and allowed the appeal.

Sections Referred:

Cases Referred:

  • The State vs. Sheikh Kadher Sheik Bedun, 1991(1) Kar. LJ. 584
  • M. Khivaraj vs. State of Mysore, AIR 1955 MYS. 128
  • State of Maharashtra vs. Sukhdev Singh and anr, 1992 3 SCC 700
  • State of UP vs. Lakshmi, 1998 SCC (Cri) 929

Top

Bibhuti Mahato vs. State of West Bengal

Filed Under: Section 84, 302, 323, 324 of Indian Penal Code
Appellant: Bibhuti Mahato
Respondent: State of West Bengal
Citation: (2000)3 CALLT 115 (HC)
Court: In the High Court of Calcutta
Judges: Nure Alam Chowdhury and Prodyot Kumar Sen

An appeal against the judgment of the Additional District Judge in Midnapore convicting Bibhuti Mahato and sentencing him to imprisonment for life on charges of murder.

Facts

On the day of the incident, Nimai Mahato informed the Jambani Police Station that around noon Bibhuti Mahato was at his door with a shovel. Bibhuti then tried to assault Nimai with the shovel but he managed to escape, receiving injuries only on his hand.

Bibhuti then apparently ran towards a nearby adjoining forest and threw the shovel into a tank located there. When Nimai went to on field he found his cousin Radhanath lying bleeding.

According to two eyewitnesses there, Bibhuti had pushed the shovel into Radhanath's belly killing him instantly. It was also learnt that Bibhuti had also assaulted his father and stepmother. Nimai informed that Bibhuti was a quiet person who worshipped Goddess Kali.

Nimai also expressed his suspicion that Bibhuti could be suffering from insanity because of which he committed the above crime. The Trial Court had directed Bibhuti to be examined by a psychiatrist to assess his mental status. The report indicated that Bibhuti was schizophrenic although the time of onset could not be determined.

It was also mentioned that his "lunacy" was not a temporary phenomenon attributable to any substance abuse. The Trial Court considered the answers given by Bibhuti during a cross-examination and concluded that he was of sound mind. The plea for insanity was rejected by the Trial Court.

They found the accused guilty and convicted and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to one year rigorous imprisonment. An appeal was made to the High Court against this judgment.

Observations of the Court

The Court observed that the Trial Court did not conduct an inquiry to ascertain whether Bibhuti was capable of making his defence; they simply called for the report from the medical officer and on receiving the report, proceeded with the observation that he was mentally fit.

The Court examined the evidence given by the witnesses including the psychiatrist and found that there were symptoms of insanity in Bibhuti's behaviour at the time of the incident.

Besides, the Court ascertained that there was no enmity between him and any of the people he attacked. The Court also drew attention to the evidence that Bibhuti had confined himself to a room for a couple of days prior to the incident worshipping Goddess Kali and on the fateful day suddenly emerged with the shovel and began his assault.

This, the Court decreed made it clear that Bibhuti was suffering from insanity at the time of the incident and was therefore incapable of understanding the nature of the act or that it was wrong or contrary to law. The Court opined that the Trial Court had not looked into the matter carefully (refer to Quotes from Judgment), and ordered Bibhuti's acquittal.

Further, the Court directed the Trial Court to obtain another report from the Superintendent of the jail regarding Bibhuti's present mental and physical status. Based on the finding further action would be taken i.e. if found to be normal, he should be released; and if not then the matter would be taken up by the appropriate department of the government for treatment.

Held: The appeal was allowed.

Sections Referred:

Quotes from the Judgment

"..the accused cannot be held liable for the accused as has been alleged by the prosecution. The learned Court below should have appreciated this fact, but the learned Court did not make any sincere endeavour to ascertain as to whether the accused was insane on the date of the incident.."

Top

The State vs. Kampu Shetty

Filed under: Section 395, Indian Penal Code, and Section 341, Criminal Procedure Code (1898)
Appellant: The State
Respondent: Kampu Shetty
Citation: AIR 1965 Mysore 95 (V 52 C 28)
Court: In the High Court of Mysore
Judges: M. Sadasivayya and Ahmed Ali Khan

Facts

Kampu Shetty, along with some other accused in a case, had been charged for an offense punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate was of the view that Kampu Shetty, though not insane, could not be made to understand the proceedings of the Court because he was dumb and deaf.

In the letter submitted by the Magistrate, it was mentioned that the Assistant Public Prosecutor, had not made any claims regarding the fact that Kampu Shetty was in no position to understand the proceedings of the Court.

The present case came up for revision on the grounds that Kampu had been charged for a punishable offense when he was not fit to understand the proceedings of the Court.

Observations of the Court

The Court stated that the attitude taken up by the assistant Public Prosecutor had not been helpful to the Court for ascertaining whether Kampu was able to understand the proceedings of the Court. The Court also contended that even though the Magistrate had mentioned this in the letter, he had taken no steps to make Kampu understand the proceedings.

The Court then referred to previous relevant cases in the light of Section 341 of the Criminal Procedure Code and stated that the object of the Section was that the High Court should be in a position to satisfy itself that the accused is ensured a fair trial. According to the Court, if the Trial Judge found that Kampu could be made to understand the proceedings of the Court then the case would proceed in a normal manner.

If however, it was found that he was unable to understand the proceedings, then the case would proceed according to Section 341 of Code of Criminal Procedure. If the trial proceeded normally, the Trial Court could pass a sentence if the accused was found guilty. However, if he failed to comprehend the proceedings, the Trial Court could evict him if evidence warranted it but would not pass a sentence against him.

In such a situation, the case would be forwarded to the High Court. It was also stated that the Trial Court, would have to see to it that Kampu got the necessary legal assistance. If he was not represented by his own advocate before the Trial Court then the Sessions Judge would have to appoint a competent advocate, at the cost of the Government, to defend him. The trail against Kampu Shetty would proceed on the basis that he had pleaded not guilty and all possible defenses open to him would be taken into consideration.

Section Referred:

  • Section 341 of the Criminal Procedure Code

Top