Skip to main content

Doctor’s certificate not enough for insanity plea - Mumbai HC

A doctor's certificate is not enough to declare that an accused was insane at the time of committing a crime, the Bombay high court has said.

A division bench of Justices V M Kanade and P D Kode made the observation on Wednesday while hearing a petition seeking confirmation of the death penalty for Santosh Mane, a state transport bus driver, who mowed down nine persons in Pune. Mane's lawyers have claimed that he was of "unsound mind" at the time of the incident and was undergoing psychiatric treatment.

"Merely because a doctor gives a certificate, it is not sufficient to declare that an accused was not sane at the time of the incident," observed the judges. "There has to be a finding by the trial court after evidence is led that the accused was of unsound mind." The bench questioned the defence over raising the plea of insanity at a belated stage.

The defence had not raised the issue during the trial. It did so only after the HC remanded the case back to the sessions court after the verdict was pronounced for the first time.

Mane's lawyers claimed that he had been subjected to electro-convulsive therapy; the doctor's report said Mane claimed "he heard voices, thought the world was going to end, a war was going on where everyone would be killed and people were coming after him".

The court asked the lawyers if Mane had reported his problems to his employers. The defence advocate said that state bus authorities had not been informed.

Public prosecutor Sandeep Shinde opposed the defence's plea and said Mane was sane and perfectly in his senses when he committed the crime. He pointed out that the trial court had ruled that his claims had no basis and he was not insane at the time of committing the crime. The high court will continue with the hearing on Thursday.

On January 25, 2012, Mane hijacked a state transport bus from Swargate depot in Pune and drove recklessly, mowing down everything in the vehicle's path. The rampage was brought to an end by the police, but not before Mane had killed nine people and injured 37 others.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Doctors-certificate-not-enough-for-insanity-plea/articleshow/37206509.cms?

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Vanishing promoters and languishing shareholders

Over Rs 60,000 crore of shareholders’ wealth is stuck in 1,450 companies suspended by the stock exchanges. More importantly, near 100 per cent pledging of promoter holding appears to be common in many of these companies. This, almost rules out any chance of the companies bouncing back. The suspension is for non-compliance of the listing norms. Vanishing Companies - Definition As per the definition stipulated by SEBI, any listed company, which raised moneythrough initial public offer and, thereafter, stopped operations, did not file returnseither with the RoC or SEBI and did not exist on the registered premises wastermed as vanishing.There are provisions under Companies Act under which companies are termedvanishing companies on satisfying certain conditions. it is provided a companywould be deemed to be a vanishing company, if it satisfies all the conditions given below : a) Failed to file returns with Registrar of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) Failed to fil