Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. The ocular evidence of the eye-witnesses about the attack made by the accused on Jacob is corroborated by medical evidence also. In fact, Mr.S.Ashok Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, did not seriously dispute the occurrence.

12. The only contention of Mr.Ashok Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, is that the appellant was suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia, a major mental illness and the appellant has established the same by examining doctors, producing medical record and the circumstances which preceded, attendant and followed the crime and he was suffering from insanity and he was not fully aware of his activities and its consequences and he is entitled to the benefit of general exception contained in Section 84 IPC and the conviction and sentence imposed on him cannot be sustained. He placed reliance on the following decisions of the Supreme Court.

3. Appellant was being treated for unsoundness of mind since 1992  Diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia.

4. Within a short span, soon after the incident from 27th June to 5th December, 1994, he had to be taken for treatment of ailment 25 times to hospital.

5. Appellant was under regular treatment for the mental ailment.

6. The weak motive of killing of wife  being that she was opposing the idea of the appellant resigning the job of a Police Constable.

7. Killing in day light  no attempt to hide or run away.

Para 20. .......... In the present case, however, it is not only the aforesaid facts but it is the totality of the circumstances seen in the light of the evidence on record to prove that the appellant was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. The unsoundness of mind before and after incident is a relevant fact. From the circumstances of the case clearly an inference can be reasonably drawn that the appellant was under a delusion at the relevant time. He was under an attack of the ailment. The anger theory on which reliance has been placed is not ruled out under schizophrenia attack. Having regard to the nature of burden on the appellant, we are of the view that the appellant has proved the existence of circumstances as required by Section 105 of the Evidence Act so as to get benefit of Section 84 IPC. We are unable to hold that the crime was committed as a result of extreme fit of anger. There is a reasonable doubt that at the time of commission of the crime, the appellant was incapable of knowing the nature of the act by reason of unsoundness of mind and, thus, he is entitled to the benefit of Section 84 IPC. Hence, the conviction and sentence of the appellant cannot be sustained."

OPINION:

He is suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia, a Major Mental Illness. He is presently treated with antipsychotic medications. He requires continuous, long term antipsychotic medications, periodic follow up and treatment by a Psychiatrist."

From the above, it is seen that the examination conducted was one of putting questions to the patient and the answers given by Ramesh Babu have been recorded and mentioned as such in Ex.D3 Observation Report. Of course, the opinion expressed is that Ramesh Babu is suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia, a major mental illness. DW.2 Dr.Malaiappan has stated that the accused Ramesh Babu was first examined in Mental Hospital on 3.2.2007 and he cannot tell as to what was his mental condition before that date and he cannot also precisely state the period of mental illness prior to their examination.