Unsoundness of mind and the law

Insanity or unsoundness of mind is not defined in the act. It means a disorder of the mind, which impairs the cognitive faculty; that is, the reasoning capacity of man to such an extent as to render him incapable of understanding consequences of his actions. It means that the person is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or of realising that the act is wrong or contrary to law
it deals with insanity in tort law, contract, and ipc

1. & the law UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND

2. INSANITY OR UNSOUNDNESS OF MINDS Insanity or unsoundness of minds can be defined as disease of mind which effects the personality mental status, critical faculties, emotional processes and interactions with social environment.

3. Insanity in Law Insanity or unsoundness of mind is not defined in the act. It means a disorder of the mind, which impairs the cognitive faculty; that is, the reasoning capacity of man to such an extent as to render him incapable of understanding consequences of his actions. It means that the person is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or of realising that the act is wrong or contrary to law 6 Non compos mentis (Not of Sound Mind): There are four types of persons of unsound mind:— An idiot; (ii) A lunatic or Insanity (iii) A person becomes unsound mind due to illness: Mental Decay (iv) A person heavily drank or consumed any intoxicated material . (V) Hypnotism

4. LEGAL PROVISIONS REGARDING “PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND IN INDIA

5. Indian Contract Act 1872

6. ( a) IDIOCY: An Idiot is a person with no intervals of saneness. He is in capable. His mental powers of understanding even ordinary matters are absent because of lack of development of brain. The agreement with an idiot is void. (b) LUNACY OR INSANITY: It is disease of brain. A lunatic loses the use of his reason due to some mental strain or disease. He may have Lucid Intervals of sanity. He can enter into contract during that period when he is of sound mind. (c) DRUNKENNESS: It produces temporary incapability till the man is under the effect of intoxication creating impotence of mind. He stands on the same footing as a lunatic. (d) HYPNOTISM: It also produce temporary incapability till the person is under the impact of artificially induced sleep. (e) MENTAL DECAY:  It is on account of old age etc. Note: an agreement with person of unsound mind is void. But under Section 68, the property of such person is always liable for necessaries supplied to him or to anyone whom he is legally bound to support. Unsoundness of mind may arise from:

7. While interpreting sec 12 of Indian Contract Act, court held that mere weakness of mind is not unsoundness of mind. Mental incapacity, arising out of any reason, deprives a person not only of a full understanding of transaction but also of the awareness that he does not understand it. A person of unsound mind is thus not necessarily a lunatic. It is sufficient if the person is incapable of judging the consequences of his acts. Kanhaiyalal v. Harsing Laxman Wanjari

8. Indian law has a different opinion from English law on this issue. Is a person of unsound mind competent to contract? English law Person of unsound is competent to contract, although the contract can be avoided at his option if he satisfies the court that he was incapable of understanding the contract and the other party had the knowledge of the same. Thus, under English law, the contract is voidable at his option. It becomes binding on him only if he affirms it, Indian law A person of unsound mind when is state of unsoundness is not competent to contract. The agreement of a person of unsound mind is void,

9. ON WHOM BURDEN OF PROOF LIES? Section 105 Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Whether the want of capacity is temporary or permanent, natural or supervening, whether it arises from disease, or exists from the time of birth, it is included in the term “Unsoundness of mind.” Every man is presumed to be sane and to possess sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crime the proof of burden lies upon the accused, until the contrary is proved,

10. Act of a person of unsound mind: Act of a person of unsound mind is exempted from the criminal liability under Section 84 of Chapter-IV (General Exception). Section 84 exonerates a person of mental incapacity who did a criminal act. To constitute guilt, a guilty mind ( mens rea ) is required. Ingredients: A criminal act is exempted from punishment, ( i ) if the accused is a person of unsound mind; (ii) if he, at the time of doing it, does not know the nature of the act; or (iii) that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law Indian Penal Code: Sec. 84

11. Section 328 – Procedure in case of accused being lunatic Section 329 – Procedure in case of person of unsound mind tried before Court Section 330 – Release of person of unsound mind pending investigation or trial Section 331 – Resumption of inquiry or trial Section 332 – Procedure on accused appearing before Magistrate or Court Section 333 – When accused appears to have been of sound mind Section 334 – Judgment of acquittal on ground of unsoundness of mind Section 335 – Person acquitted on such ground to be detained in safe custody Section 336 – Power of State Government to empower officer in charge to discharge Section 337 – Procedure where lunatic prisoner is reported capable of making his defence Section 338 – Procedure where lunatic detained is declared fit to be released Section 339 – Delivery of lunatic to care of relative or friend Chapter 25 – Provisions As To Accused Persons of Unsound Mind

12. Role of Unsoundness under family Law, categorically effects on marriage Hindu Law Other Personal Law Neither party is incapable of giving a valid consent as a consequence of unsoundness of mind if capable must not suffer from mental disorders of such to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children Must not suffer from recurrent attacks of insanity . Marriages in contravention to the provision with respect to mental disorders is voidable category. Divorce or judicial separation can be obtained if the person has been “incurably of unsound mind,” or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from “mental disorder to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent . A woman can obtain a decree of divorce under “The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1959”, if her husband has been insane for 2 years. A marriage is voidable if either party is a lunatic or idiot. Christians can obtain divorce on grounds of unsoundness of mind provided: ( i ) It must be incurable (ii) it must be present for at least 2 years immediately preceding the petition. Muslim Law Christian Law Section 5(ii): Section 12 Section 13

13. English law recognizes insanity as a possible defence. In Arnold case, the Court declared that the accused was totally deprived of his understanding and memory and did not know what he was doing, nor more than an infant, a brute or a wild beast . The Indian Law on insanity based on the rules laid down in the Mc’ Naghten case. PLEA OF INSANITY

14. BRIEF FACTS Mac Naughton’s case (1843) 4 St Tr (NS) 847

15. In India: Mc Naughten’s principles have been adopted too. Section 84 contains the three important principles of them . JUDGMENT Some principles commonly known as “Mc. Naughten Principles of Insanity ”

16. RECOMMENDATION OF 42nd REPORT OF LAW COMMISSION IN INDIA .

17. CRITICS OF Mc’ Naghten Rules

18. Dahyabhai Chhaganbai Thakkar vs. State of Gujarat (AIR 1964 SC 1563) Brief Facts

19. JUDGEMENT The Supreme Court summarised the principles of the plea of insanity the in the context of Burden of Proof:

20. Ashok Dattatraya vs. State of Maharashtra (1993 CrLJ 3450 Bom )

21. S.K. Nair vs. State of Punjab (SC 1997 SCC 141) Brief Facts

22. The Indian Law on insanity is based on the rules laid down in the Mc’Naghten case. However, the Mc’Naghten rules have become obsolete and are not proper and suitable in the modern era. The Law Commission of India in its 42nd report after considering the desirability of introducing the test of diminished responsibility under IPC, s. 84 gave its opinion in the negative due to the complicated medico-legal issue it would introduce in trial.  There are three compartments of the mind – controlling cognition, emotion and will. IPC, s. 84 only exempts one whose cognitive faculties are affected.  The Courts must also adopt a broader view of the Insanity and introduce the concept of diminished responsibility. conclusion