Bar & Bench (

Similar documents
2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State Ms. Farhat Jamal Siddiqui.

2. Heard Sri Bhola Singh Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rishad Murtza, learned Government Advocate.

Contempt of Courts (CAT) Rules, Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS) RULES, 1981

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW. Original Application No. 113 of Monday, this the 17 th day of April, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.M.C. No. 233/2014 Date of decision: 14th February, 2014.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No of 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

REGISTRAR GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Standing Counsel for CBI with Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocate.

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW RESERVE (Court No. 2) Original Application No. 47 of 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No of Decided On:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No of 2013

CHAPTER 559 MENTAL DISEASES

J U D G M E N T (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5124/06) A.K. MATHUR, J.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE. THE HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5144 OF 2015

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment pronounced on:

HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI NOTIFICATION

CHAPTER 17. Lunatics. Part A GENERAL. (b) Lunatics for whose detention in an asylum a reception order has been passed.

CRIMINAL SECTION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)

TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST REPEAT VIOLENCE

The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 [As amended by the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 No. 43 of 2006]

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR. Writ Petition No. 623 OF 2017 (PIL) PETITIONER : Kanhaiya Shailesh & Others. Vs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Ritesh Sinha son of Sh. Rabindra Narain Sinha, aged 36 years,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK. CRLMC No Of 2006

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA. No. 35 OF An Act to amend the Criminal Procedure Code

State Of A.P vs V. Sarma Rao & Ors. Etc. Etc on 10 November, 2006

INMATE FORM FOR CIVIL ACTIONS FILED IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant

Case :- SERVICE BENCH No of Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla,J. Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh-I,J.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR C.S.T.A.NO.

Ajoy Kumar Ghose vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 18 March, 2009

M.R.C.P. Rule 4 Page 1

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015

CHAPTER XVII. Appeals to the High Court And Superintendence and. revision and transfer of cases by the High Court. Jail Petitions

versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO OF Association for Democratic Reforms Versus

THE CRIMINAL LAW (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018

Reserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015. Versus

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.933 OF Dr. RAM LAKHAN SINGH. PETITIONER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. Reserved on: Date of decision:

The Protection of Human Rights Act, No 10 of 1994

SCHEME FOR RELIEF AND REHABILITATION OF OFFENCES (BY ACIDS) ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN

Supreme Court of India. S.N. Sharma vs Bipen Kumar Tiwari And Ors on 10 March, 1970

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P.378/2015 Date of Reserve: Date of Decision: versus

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) IMPHAL BENCH

NEBRASKA HEADING CATCHLINE LAW

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

THE SUPREME COURT'S ON MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE. By Adv. (Dr.) Santosh A. Shah, Kolhapur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2785/2009

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI OFFICE OF THE COMMISIONER OF INDUSTRIES 419, UDYOGSADAN, FIE, PATPARGANJ,DELHI -92

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONAL BENCH BHOPAL. Original Application No. 264/2014 (THC) (CZ)

versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J. 1. In this writ petition filed by the petitioner, the challenge is made to

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PIL WRIT PETITION NO.70 OF 2006

A.F.R. Judgment delivered on

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

THE CRIMINAL LAW (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2010 BILL

KALISPEL TRIBE OF INDIANS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.68 OF Youth Bar Association of India O R D E R

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. Criminal Appeal No of 2012 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No of 2010) Decided On:

Bar & Bench (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. W.P.(C) No.2940/1995. Date of Decision : March 3, 2009.

CHAPTER XIV. Probate and Letters of Administration. 2. The word will in this Chapter includes a codicil.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 12 th January, W.P.(C) 7068/2014

(Oral : V.K. Shukla, J.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 18th May, 2012 Pronounced on:2nd July, 2012 FAO 398/2000

W.P. (C) No of 2005

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Small Industries Development Bank of India ( SIDBI)

CHAPTER 4. Special Procedure. PART I CRIMINAL Part A SPECIAL RULES OF PROCEDURE IN ORIGINAL CRIMINAL CASES [OMITTED]

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH AHMEDABAD

W.P.No.32054/2014 (GM-RES) ORDER. In Prakash Singh Vs. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 1, Apex Court issued several directions in the matter of police

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi. Cr.M.P.No.141 of Binod Kumar Singh..Petitioner V E R S U S

TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WITHOUT MINOR CHILD(REN)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.

Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate : Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey, Sr. S.C. I

Bar and Bench (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE :BEFORE: THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6306/2013

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: July 24, W.P.(C) 7444/2018, C.M. APPL. No /2018

J U D G M E N T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2007 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No of 2006) Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NDPS ACT. Judgment reserved on :11th November, Judgment delivered on: 06th February, 2012

FINAL JUDGMENT OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING (AFTER NOTICE)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.1 OF 2017 IN RE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.S.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CONDONATION OF DELAY. W.P (C ) No /2006. Judgment reserved on: October 19, 2006

The Administrator of Lunatic s Estates Act

Bar & Bench (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.REV.P. 76/2009 Reserved on: 30th April, 2012 Decided on: 11th July, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. W.P. Crl. No. 1029/2010. Decided on: 9th August, 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

Maryland Laws on Bail Page D-1. Maryland Declaration of Rights

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.5 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS. Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s).

BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. SEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P.(C) No.7886/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 15th July, 2013

Supreme Court of India Arun Vyas & Anr vs Anita Vyas on 14 May, 1999 Author: J S.Shah Quadri Bench: K.Venkataswami, Syed Shah Quadri

Prisoners Act [1900] [Act No. 3 of 1900]

Transcription:

Court No. - 9 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 29706 of 2018 Petitioner :- Brijesh @ Puchchi Thru Mother Rajkumari Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru Prin Secy Home Lko & Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Srivastava,Devki Nandan Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. The petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the investigating agency to conduct fair and impartial investigation in First Information Report No. 0123/2018 under Sections 366, 366A I.P.C., Section 18 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Rehra Bajar, District Balrampur. 2. Gist of the issue raised in the petition is recorded in order dated 26th November, 2018. The order reads as under. 1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus 2. It has been pointed out that the petition has been filed through the mother of the petitioner. 3. In para 3 of the petition, it has been pleaded that the petitioner is of unsound mind and is unable to know the nature of act committed by him. 4. We have considered the provisions of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code which read as under : "84. Act of a person of unsound mind. -Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law. We have also considered the provisions of Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides procedure in case of accused being lunatic. 5. We deem it just and proper to direct respondents to get the mental health of the petitioner assessed under Mental Health Care Act, 2017. We direct the petitioner to provide an assistant who would be required to stay in the medical facility for assessment of mental health of the petitioner. We hereby direct the investigating agency to stay all proceedings in the matter. In case charge-sheet has been prepared, no action thereupon be taken. 6. The Court has been informed that the petitioner is confined in jail. If

that be so, the custody of the petitioner be taken by the investigating agency to get this order complied with. 7. List on 17.12.2018. 8. Superintendent of Police, Balrampur to ensure compliance. 2 9. Let a copy of this order be conveyed to Superintendent of Police, Balrampur by Mr. S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State, and through Senior Registrar of the Court. 3. In deference to direction issued vide above extracted order, particularly para 5, the mental health of the petitioner was assessed by a Board of Doctors of King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Department of Psychiatric. It has been found medically that the petitioner is suffering from severe disabling condition which is untreatable and needs continuous care and support for carrying out day to day activities. 4. On 17th December, 2018, the following order was passed directing Superintendent of Police, Balrampur to take cognizance of the facts and circumstances of the case and ensure that appropriate action is taken before the next date of listing:- 1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus 2. Order dated 26.11.2018, notices the gist of the issue raised by the petitioner. The order reads as under:- 1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus 2. It has been pointed out that the petition has been filed through the mother of the petitioner. 3. In para 3 of the petition, it has been pleaded that the petitioner is of unsound mind and is unable to know the nature of act committed by him. 4. We have considered the provisions of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code which read as under:- "84. Act of a person of unsound mind. -Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law. We have also considered the provisions of Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides procedure in case of accused being lunatic.

5. We deem it just and proper to direct respondents to get the mental health of the petitioner assessed under Mental Health Care Act, 2017. We direct the petitioner to provide an assistant who would be required to stay in the medical facility for assessment of mental health of the petitioner. 3 We hereby direct the investigating agency to stay all proceedings in the matter. In case charge-sheet has been prepared, no action thereupon be taken. 6. The Court has been informed that the petitioner is confined in jail. If that be so, the custody of the petitioner be taken by the investigating agency to get this order complied with. 7. List on 17.12.2018. 8. Superintendent of Police, Balrampur to ensure compliance. 9. Let a copy of this order be conveyed to Superintendent of Police, Balrampur by Mr. S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State, and through Senior Registrar of the Court. 3. Instructions in writing have been filed in Court, which is taken on record. 4. Sri S.P. Singh learned Counsel for the State has informed the Court that a board of Doctors of King Jeorge's Medical University, Lucknow, Department of Psychiatry, medically examined the petitioner. The petitioner was hospitalized and evaluated. It has been found that the petitioner is in a severe disabling condition which is un treatable and needs continuous care and support for carrying out day to day activities. 5. Sri S. P. Singh learned counsel for the State has assured the Court that in view of the mental condition of the petitioner, further investigation would be conducted. Sri S.P. Singh has further informed that the petitioner is confined in Jail. 6. We are of the opinion that the investigating agency is not sensitive even to the mental state of a citizen who might have been accused of committing an offence. Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code as extracted in the above extracted order mandates that nothing is an offence which has been done by a person who at the time of doing it by reason of unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing the nature of the act. Despite such statutory and legal position the petitioner appears to have been confined in jail. 7.The conduct of the prosecuting agency is clearly in violation of the human rights. 8. We hereby direct Superintendent of Police Balrampur to take cognizance of the facts and circumstances of the case and ensure that appropriate action is taken on or before the next date of listing. 9. List on 04.01.2019. 10. In case the needful is not done, we shall be constrained on summoning Superintendent of Police, Balrampur to Court as to under what circumstances the mental health of the petitioner was ignored at the first instance. 11. Let a copy of this order be conveyed to Superintendent of Police, Balrampur through Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State. 5. Affidavit of Shri Amit Kumar posted as Superintendent of Police,

4 Balrampur has been filed in Court along with certain documents. It is apparent that the Investigating Agency is now conscious of the fact that the petitioner is suffering from severe mental disability conditions, as opined by a Board of Doctors of King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Department of Psychiatric. Under the circumstances, an application has been moved in the Court concerned vide Annexure CA-2 dated 1st January, 2019 with a prayer that appropriate direction be issued. 6. We are pained at recording that human rights are the last consideration for the Investigating officers. Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code reads as under: "84. Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law." 7. The report furnished by the Board of Doctors indicates that all that the petitioner keeps saying is 'Mummy ke paas jana hai'. The petitioner is not able to perform his day to day activities. Surely such mental and physical condition of the petitioner was obvious at the time when the Investigating Officer thought it prudent to arrest the petitioner. The petitioner would also have been produced before the Magistrate/Special Court. The facts and circumstances clearly warranted the Investigating Officer and the Court to ensure that the petitioner is subjected to medical examination. If the needful had been done, the Investigating Agency and the Court would have been sensitized about the medical condition of the petitioner and right of the petitioner under Section 84 I.P.C. (supra) would have been respected. 8. In consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case, and in particular the report furnished by the Board of Doctors we are in no doubt that the Investigating Officer has failed in performance of his duties and has not cared for the rights of the petitioner. 9. We further find that the matter is not being given due importance even at this stage. Apparently, the petitioner has not been released from jail even till date. 10. We deem it just and proper, in the interest of substantial justice to direct

5 the Jail Authorities concerned to release the petitioner forthwith on receipt of copy of this order, which would be released under signatures of the Bench Secretary. 11. We further direct the officer responsible for not subjecting the petitioner to medical examination, and effecting his arrest, to be burdened with cost in the sum of Rs.25,000/- to be deducted from his salary. Superintendent of Police, Balrampur is directed to ensure compliance within 15 days. The cost amount shall be paid to Rajkumari, the mother of the petitioner through whom the petition has been filed. 12. Compliance report be sent to this Court by the next date of listing. 13. We make it clear that in case custody of the petitioner is required by the Prosecuting agency, the agency would be at liberty to file an application before this Court, for reasons in law and facts mentioned in the application. 14. List on 21.01.2019. 15. In case needful is not done, additional cost in the sum of Rs.20,000/- would be imposed. Superintendent of Police, Balrampur would also be summoned in case needful is not done. Order Date :- 4.1.2019 VKS