Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. For better appreciation of the trial Court judgment in this regard, the reasoning of the trial Court as found in Paragraph 27 of the judgment, is extracted below:-

''27. ...... Whether the accused has suffered from https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Paranoid Schizophrenia at the time of occurrence? In this regard, this Court has gone through the evidence of D.W.1, it shows that on requisition letter received from Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur, the accused produced before her on 07.05.2015. Then the accused was admitted in hospital as inpatient for taking treatment from 07.05.2015 to 13.05.2015. During the said period, D.W.1 found that the accused is suffered Paranoid Schizophrenia illness. The requisition letter was marked as Ex.D.1, D.W.1 report is marked as Ex.D.2. Both the documents are not established that at the time of occurrence, the accused suffered Paranoid Schizophrenia. In cross examination, D.W.1 has revealed that on fermentation given from the accused relatives, the accused suffering the Paranoid Schizophrenia. Further, D.W.1 has deposed in his evidence from 07.06.2014 to 11.06.2014 the accused taking treatment as outpatient. But, D.W.1 did not know what kind of disease, the accused taking treatment from that period. Further, another Doctor was examined by the accused as D.W.2. D.W.2 deposed his evidence the accused has taken treatment two times in Government Mental Hospital at Kilpauk. Further, D.W.2 deposed in his evidence prior to the occurrence, the accused taking treatment from 07.06.2014 to 11.06.2014. Further, D.W.2 admitted in his evidence when the patient was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis completing cure of the disease, at that time only discharge from the hospital. Further, he deposed in his evidence, there is no document available to prove that the accused brought to the hospital in second time. Further, the accused is discharged from hospital on 27.05.2015 at the time, the accused is in good condition. Further, D.W.2 deposed in his evidence, he did not ascertain the accused's mental condition in between 07.06.2014 and 07.06.2015. The overall evidence of D.W.1and D.W.2 and Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.8 not shows that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. .....''

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis the influence of Paranoid Schizophrenia. To presume anything contrary, the prosecution ought to have produced medical records. In fact, even according to the prosecution, the accused, after the occurrence, has not fled or absconded, but was sleeping in the Bus Stand when he was arrested and he was not in good orientation of mind.

10. This Court visualizes that an Engineering graduate, after causing death of his father, lying on the Bus Stand Bench, must be taken as an indication of his mental illness. This Court summoned the medical records from the Hospitals to satisfy whether the evidence of D.W.1 and D.W.2 regarding the mental illness of the appellant even prior to the occurrence is correct. Since the trial Court had no advantage of perusing that record, it has concluded that there is no document available to prove that the accused was brought to the Hospital for the second time and he was suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia prior to the occurrence. The failure of the Doctor to bring the entire records and produce before the Court when he was summoned to produce the same before the Court, cannot be prejudiced to the appellant, who in fact, had been suffering from the said disease for a long time even prior to the occurrence.

''Paranoid Schizophrenia, Paranoia and Paraphernia.- Paranoia is now regarded as a mild form of paranoid schizophrenia. It occurs more in males than females. The main characteristic of this illness is a well- elaborated delusional system in a personality that is otherwise well preserved. The delusions are of a persecutory https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis type. The true nature of the illness may go unrecognised for a long time because the personality is well preserved, and some of these paranoiacs may pass off as social reformers or founders of queer pseudo-religious sects. The classical picture is rare and generally takes a chronic course.

16. This Court is of the view that the trial Court has not properly appreciated Ex.D.4 Letter of the Director of Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk, Chennai, addressed to the Jail Superintendent, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli, extracting the discharge summary of the appellant, wherein a reference about the patient being admitted as voluntary boarder and diagnosed as Schizophrenia [a major mental illness] on 07.06.2014. The trial Court for want of supporting document to this fact, had disbelieved the case of the defence that he is a Paranoid Schizophrenia patient. However, after perusal of the documents produced, this Court is satisfied what is stated in Ex.D.4 is correct. From Ex.D.2, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis the proceedings of the learned Judicial Magistrate is also clear that the appellant was sent to the Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk, Chennai, for treatment, since he was diagnosed with Paranoid Schizophrenia. Though there is ample medical record produced by the defence to show that the appellant is suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia since 2006 and under irregular treatment, the trial Court had gone wrong in holding that there is no evidence to show that on the date of occurrence, there is no proof that the appellant was suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia.