Convicted for husband’s murder, Kerala High Court suspends life sentence of woman suffering from schizophrenia

The court observed that the aim and object of Chapter XXV (provisions as to accused persons of unsound mind) of CrPC is that an accused of unsound mind should not be put to trial as he is unable to defend himself. It further noted that serious prejudice was caused to the woman and she was denied a fair trial.

Accordingly, the court ordered suspension of sentence and granted bail to the woman.

Case

• According to the prosecution, the incident occurred in the early hours of July 6, 2013, when the accused-woman allegedly struck her husband on the head with an iron pipe and later dragged the body to the roadside.
• After her neighbours discovered the body, a murder case was registered by the police. Though the couple’s son was initially arraigned as a co-accused, he was later removed from the case.
• Following trial, the sessions court convicted the accused-woman and sentenced her to life imprisonment.
• She challenged the conviction before the High Court and sought suspension of sentence pending appeal.

Court’s ruling

• A perusal of the records placed before us would prima facie direct to the fact that immediately after the incident she was admitted in the hospital and it was found that the appellant had been suffering from schizophrenia with features of irregular talk, inappropriate affect and poor judgment.
• She had been undergoing treatment even prior to the commission of the offence. Even during the trial, she was treated in various psychiatric hospitals and she was once declared as ‘not fit to stand’ for trial by doctors and was given institutional care.
• Having considered the records and the sequence of events, the sessions judge has failed to comply with the mandate under Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
• Despite the medical records showing that the appellant was suffering from paranoid Schizophrenia and Psychosis for over 20 years prior to the commission of crime and though she had been undergoing treatment, the legal aid counsel who had defended the appellant did not even take up a defence that the appellant, at the time of commission of the offense, was suffering from unsoundness of mind.
• There must be a specific order of the court recording a finding that the insanity of the accused has been ceased and he is in a fit mental condition to defend himself.
• Judicial satisfaction must be recorded after independent scrutiny of the facts and circumstances to ensure that the rights of the accused are fully safeguarded.
• If the accused is put to trial without arriving at the above independent satisfaction and by recording a finding to that effect, the trial itself will be vitiated.
• This is a fit case wherein the application of suspension should be allowed so that she can undergo treatment for the mental ailments.