MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

WIFE MURDERED HUSBAND - MODIFIES CONVICTION FROM MUREDER TO CULPABLE HOMIVIDE – Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment delivered on June 26, 2023, the Delhi High Court addressed the case of an appellant suffering from psychosis and highlighted the state's duty to care for mentally ill prisoners. The judgment modified the appellant's convictioan and emphasized the need for proper medical treatment and support for individuals with mental illnesses.

Bench Stated, "Even though the mental illness of the appellant was not such that she can take the defense of insanity, it certainly falls under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC." The court recognized that the appellant, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, was on treatment for psychosis since 1996, indicating a milder form of schizophrenia. The presence of psychosis during the alleged offense led to a loss of self-control even with slight provocation. Consequently, the court modified the appellant's conviction from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Section 304(1) IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

The judgment shed light on the state's responsibility for the care of mentally ill prisoners. Referring to a previous case, the court emphasized that the state must continue to look after mentally unstable individuals, even after their release from judicial custody. It highlighted the duty to provide adequate medical treatment, counseling, and rehabilitation services, particularly for those who do not require regular hospitalization and lack suitable living arrangements. The court called for the establishment of Short Stay Homes and Long Stay Homes to ensure a safe and conducive environment for individuals with mental illnesses.

The judgment also addressed the period of judicial custody undergone by the appellant. Considering the time spent at the Institute of Human Behavior and Allied Sciences (IHBAS) as part of judicial custody, the court determined that the appellant had already undergone a significant period of imprisonment. Furthermore, it emphasized that the state must continue to bear the expenses of necessary treatment and the appellant's stay in a suitable facility.

This judgment serves as a significant step towards recognizing the rights and needs of mentally ill prisoners within the criminal justice system. It highlights the importance of proper care, support, and rehabilitation for individuals with mental illnesses, ensuring their well-being and dignified treatment.

Date of Judgment: June 26, 2023           

MADHU BALA  vs STATE 

Latest Legal News