Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. The trial court record reveals that there is a compendium of medical documents filed by the appellant to establish on record that from 13th July, 1996 he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, as certified by various Institutes and Hospitals including Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Jaipur Golden Hospital and the Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences. Indeed, this fact is not disputed by the respondents.

8. It is well-known that paranoid schizophrenia is a mental disease. It can recur. The question which now arises is as to what is „paranoid schizophrenia‟. The Supreme Court in the case of Shrikant Anand Rao Bhosale vs. State of Maharashtra (2002) 7 SCC 748 in the context of the murder committed by the appellant of his wife, has examined the ingredients of paranoid schizophrenia in paragraphs 10 of its judgment, with reference to Modi‟s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (22nd Edition) as follows: -

"10. What is paranoid schizophrenia, when it starts, what are its characteristics and dangers flowing from this ailment. Paranoidschizophrenia, in the vast majority of cases, starts in the fourth decade and develops insidiously. Suspiciousness is the characteristic symptom of the early stage. Ideas of reference occur, which gradually develops into delusions of persecution. Auditory hallucinations follow, which in the beginning, start as sounds or noises in the ears, but are afterwards changes into abuses or insults. Delusions are at first indefinite, but gradually they become fixed and definite, to lead the patient to believe that he is persecuted by some unknown person or some super human agency. He believes that his food is being poisoned, some noxious gases are blown into his room, and people are plotting against him to ruin him. Disturbances of general sensation gives rise to hallucinations, which are attributed to the effects of hypnotism, electricity wireless telegraphy oratomic agencies. The patient gets very irritated and excited owing to these painful and disagreeable hallucinations and delusions. Since so many people are against him and are interested in his ruin, he comes to believe that he must be a very important man. The nature of delusions thus may change from prosecutor to the grandiose type. He entertains delusions of grandeur, power and wealth, and generally conducts himself in a haughty and overbearing manner. The patient usually retains his money and orientation and does not show signs of insanity, until the conversation is directed to the particular type of delusion from which he is suffering. When delusions affect his behavior, he is often a source of danger to himself and to others. [Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (22nd Edn.)]"

9. Paranoid Schizophrenia is, therefore, a disability which squarely falls within the ambit of the provisions of Section 6 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Yet, in the instant case, the learned trial court has, in a casual manner, dismissed the suit of the appellant refusing to take note of the disability of the appellant, merely by observing that there is nothing to prove the same. At the risk of repetition, it is reiterated that there is a sheaf of medical documents, which appear at pages 219 to 331 of the trial court‟s record, which clearly establish the fact that the appellant was suffering from depression, schizophrenia, insomnia and other allied medical conditions. In such circumstances, it was incumbent upon the learned trial court to decide the application under Order XXXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure for treating the appellant as an „indigent person‟ and thereafter to provide the appellant with a counsel at State expense, before undertaking the exercise of deciding whether the suit was barred by limitation, keeping in view the provisions of Section 6 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The trial court chose to ignore the indigency of the appellant and even his disability and to dismiss the suit in a hasty manner.