Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The Investigation:

3. The complaint was registered at about 11.15 a.m. by PSI of Kagawad police station (PW12) and further investigation was taken up by the Police Inspector (PW15). He conducted the inquest of the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW9-Basappa and CW3-Manjanagouda as per Ex.P10. He also recorded the statements of the CW6 and NC: 2024:KHC-D:14140-DB CW13 and seized the clothes of the deceased under mahazar as per Ex.P4 in the presence of PW2-Nabiraj and CW5- Mahadev. He also conducted the spot mahazar as per Ex.P5. He instructed his staff to search for the accused, who was secured on 27.08.2018, and she was sent for medical examination. At the instance of the medical officer, she was referred for further examination to Civil Hospital, which is also known as Belgaum Institute of Medical Sciences (BIMS hospital), Belagavi. The accused was admitted to BIMS hospital and on 22.11.2018, after a formal medical examination at Government Hospital, Athani, she was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The report of the BIMS hospital was secured on 28.09.2018 and thereafter it appears that she was treated at DIMHANS (Dharwad Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences) Dharwad. The medical reports of both BIMS and DIMHANS are at Ex.P8 and Ex.P20. On completion of the investigation, he found that there is no material against the accused to show that she had committed the offence of murder while she was capable of understanding what she was doing and since the NC: 2024:KHC-D:14140-DB accused was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, he filed 'B' summary report. The learned Magistrate did not accept the 'B' summary report but he took cognizance of the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC finding sufficient material for the said offence and then committed the case to the Sessions Court, Belagavi, sitting at Chikodi.

4. The learned Sessions Judge, finding that the accused was capable of understanding the trial and that she is fit to stand for the trial, framed charges for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. As such, trial was ordered. During the trial, the accused could not engage a counsel on her own and therefore, a Legal Aid Defence Counsel was appointed.

5. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses as PW1 to PW17 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P23 and M.O.1 to 3 were marked in the evidence. After recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused chosen to lead defence evidence and Dr.Saraswati N, Medical Superintendent of DIMHANS was examined as DW1. After hearing the NC: 2024:KHC-D:14140-DB arguments by both the sides, the Sessions Court came to the conclusion that the accused has committed offence under Section 302 of IPC by rejecting the defence of the accused that at the time of the incident she was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, which is a mental disorder. Holding so, the learned Sessions Judge sentenced the accused to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with a default sentence of two months simple imprisonment.

NC: 2024:KHC-D:14140-DB Arguments:

8. The learned counsel appearing for the accused, Sri Ganapathi M Bhat, would submit that the investigating officer had rightly come to the conclusion that the accused was incapable of understanding her own actions when the incident had taken place. He submits that the neighbours as well as the husband of the accused had disclosed before the investigating officer that the accused was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and she had taken treatment from 2013 at DIMHANS. On three occasions, she had been admitted to DIMHANS for the treatment of the said disease and only if she takes medicines daily, she would be fit enough as a normal person but in case, if she does not take medicines prescribed, she becomes abnormal and incapable of understanding her own actions. This conclusion of Investigating Officer was not accepted by the learned Magistrate and the trial Court took cognizance and matter was committed to the Sessions Court. He points out that the Sessions Court also did not bestow its attention to medical records in a proper way and had only considered the fact NC: 2024:KHC-D:14140-DB that when she was in judicial custody, she was given medicines regularly and as such she was fit for trial.

9. The learned counsel Sri. Ganapathi M Bhat would also point out that the testimony of PW6- Dr.P.S.Sonalkar, PW7-Dr.Chandrashekhar T.R., PW17- Dr.Rajendra Katti coupled with DW1-Dr.Saraswati N., would clinchingly show that the accused is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and if she stops taking medicines, she would behave abnormal and would not be in a position to understand her own actions. The testimonies of these medical officers clearly establish the mental illness suffered by the accused and therefore, there cannot be any doubt about such mental illness. He further submits that the testimony of the neighbours as well as other witnesses would clearly indicate that they had given statement before the investigating officer that they came to know from the husband of the accused-Bahubali that the accused had not taken medicines for about 2-3 days prior to the incident. Therefore, as on the date of the incident, she was suffering from schizophrenia and her behaviors were abnormal. When