![]() ![]() Provision for Insanity Defence is given under Section 84 of IPC under “Act of person of unsound mind” which states that nothing is an offence if it is done by a person who, at the time of commission, because of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of understanding the nature and consequences of the act he/she is doing and also was unaware that the same is prohibited by law.Īnalysing the aforementioned Section, it is clear that the provision is much influenced by the McNaughton’s Test, and since it is based upon the 5-point propositions it is divided into two broad categories, first being Major criteria which cover cases where the person was suffering from mental illness during the crime and the Second being Minor criteria which cover cases:ġ. It is a test of knowing what is right and wrong. The rules emphasized the observation of “understandability” of an accused in a case where he/she has done something wrong. These propositions became precedent for the law concerning the defence of insanity. The propositions were as follows:ġ.That it is to be presumed that a convict is sane until the contrary is proven.Ģ.That an insane person would be liable for punishment if he/she knows at the time of the commission of crime what he/she is doing.ģ.That to establish a defence on insanity, the accused by way of his/her insanity should not be in a position to know the nature and consequences of his/her act.Ĥ.That the delusions to which the accused is suffering should be real.ĥ.The jury in English Law is responsible for deciding if someone is insane or not. These five propositions were construed as the McNaughton’s rules. After this judgment in 1843, there was a discussion in the House of Lords, where a five-point proposition was made. But the jury considering him insane and therefore brought in a verdict of admitting him in a Mental Asylum. ![]() His state of mind was not sane and therefore the court ordered for his acquittal. ![]() ![]() In this case, a man named McNaughton killed Edward Drummond mistaking him for some other person. McNaughton, devised the McNaughton’s Test which formed the basis of modern-day Insanity Law and is also the basis of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code. These three tests were the early laws relating to Insanity Defence and laid the foundation for the landmark Mc-Naughton Test. This test was the first formal enactment which led the basis for Law of Insanity and with this marked the advent of Insanity Defence.įollowing the “Wild Beast Test”, various other tests were also deduced to check if a person is legally insane such as the Insane Delusion test, the Good and Evil test wherein it was to be seen that the person who had committed some crime has the ability to distinguish between good and evil. With further developments in jurisprudence, the British courts in the 18th Century came up with the “Wild Beast” test by virtue of which a defendant was not to be convicted if he/she had an understanding of an infant or a wild beast. A provision related to Insanity Defence was first recorded in a 1581 English legal treatise wherein, if a lunatic in the time of his lunacy kills someone, they cannot be held accountable. Laws related to Defence-insanity has been a part of man-made laws since ancient Greece and Rome. For these reasons, Insanity law has proven to be of great importance in understanding the mental position of an insane person and in suitable circumstances grant them exemptions from criminal charges. This law is based upon the assumption that whenever an insane person commits a crime in a fit of insanity, he/she does not have a guilty mind to understand what he/she is doing, and that the act is prohibited by law. Under the provision of Section 84, the law protects an unsound minded person and provides him/her defence from criminal liability, which is also known as the Law of Insanity. In India, Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code describes the defence of insanity. This is why it is more of an excuse rather than a justification of what he/she has done. Insanity defence refers to a defence wherein a criminal admits the action but asserts an absence of understanding based on mental illness. This article focuses on the concept of insanity in law and how it has become a loophole in the modern judicial system. The burden of proof to prove insanity is on the alleged and he/she has to supply the court with evidence similar to that of “preponderance of the evidence” as in the civil case. It is to be noted here that this is a legal concept and therefore simply suffering from a mental disorder is not sufficient to prove insanity. It is based on the assumption that at the time of the crime, the person was suffering from mental illness and therefore, was incapable of understanding what he/she was doing. In Indian Legal System “Insanity Defence” is a tool in criminal law to save an alleged from the accountability of a crime. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |