Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has directed a psychiatric evaluation of a murder convict seeking bail, pending appeal, after he raised a plea of insanity. The accused, Pradeep Murugan, was in 2019 convicted of killing his father in 2015 in Pune.
A division bench of Justices Bharat Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande observed that an insanity plea necessarily requires proof. In a Nov 27 order, the HC said, “Insanity may be of varying degrees and may involve different stages of mental disorder, and not every mentally diseased person ipso-facto can be termed to be insane or to be of unsound mind.”
However, in case bail is granted, the question that arises is of safety, both for the accused and for the people he would reside with once released, the HC said.
Murugan’s counsel, Satyavrat Joshi, invoked section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, which says it is no offence if the accused is incapable of understanding the nature of their actions or that they were doing something wrong. Joshi cited an Aug 2022 report from Yerawada jail referring to the accused’s past violent behaviour and restlessness. The HC said since more than two years have lapsed, it would need to ensure that if granted bail, it doesn’t prove detrimental to his interest and those of his family members.
Medical experts of Yerawada jail have to assess the convict and submit a report by Dec 11 to the HC.
Joshi relied on a top court ruling that holds it is a collective responsibility of the accused, court, and the prosecution to decipher proof of insanity by treating the proceeding as non-adversarial, keeping friendly relations with the accused, and regarding him as one having a disability and as a victim in need of help. The focus, the SC said, is to facilitate the person of unsound mind to stand trial.
Murugan had two defence witnesses, one a psychiatrist attached to the Yerawada Central Jail, who said he was treated for a depressed mood and other behavioural aspects since July 2016 in jail, but has since recovered and is on a “maintenance treatment.” The HC felt the witness didn’t enlighten the court on the accused’s mental state on the date of the offence.
The second witness, his sister, referred to his “disorderly behaviour” as early as 2010. The HC will hear the matter next on Dec 12.
