Do we need a change in approach to mental disorder defence in India?

In India, the issue of criminals evading probes, sentences by claiming mental health conditions - although rare - is concerning since it poses challenges for the justice system and raises apprehensions about the appropriate handling of mental health in criminal cases. While mental health conditions are legitimate medical issues necessitating proper care and understanding; some individuals accused of crimes could exploit the conditions to avoid punishment or participating in a probe.

Earlier this year, Karnataka-based start-up CEO was arrested for killing her son in Goa and her father in March 2024 filed a plea in the court seeking medical reevaluation of her mental condition by a board of doctors under the Mental Healthcare Act.

Subsequently, rape-accused, former MP of Hassan - Prajwal Revanna - too claimed that when the allegations first surfaced and some political parties tried to malign his image, he was depressed and thus had been isolating in Munich. Revanna - who is former Prime Minister HD Deve Gowda's grandson and nephew of Union Minister HD Kumaraswamy - had made the statement in a self-recorded video on May 27, 2024, a month after he fled to the German city. He was arrested when he returned to India on May 31.

In light of such cases, it becomes imperative to understand how mental health defences are used in criminal cases, the challenges in distinguishing genuine cases from fraudulent claims, and the broader implications for the justice system and society.

Legal framework

India's legal system includes provisions to address mental health concerns. The Mental Health Care Act, 2017, aims to protect the rights of individuals with mental health issues.

Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) Section 329, if a person is found unfit to stand trial due to mental illness, they may be admitted to a psychiatric facility instead of facing court proceedings. Similarly, if someone is diagnosed with a mental health condition, they might receive a reduced sentence or be sent to a mental health institution instead of prison.

Mumbai-based criminal lawyer Adv Prashant Salsingikar, speaking to mid-day, said that under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 84 which states that nothing is an offence done by a person - who at the time of doing it - by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of act or whether the doing is either wrong or contrary to law.

Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.

"I have not seen many people claim insanity since it puts all the onus on the accused. The trial then happens to prove whether the accused person was of sound mind at the time of the criminal act. Thus, it is rare to see anyone taking insanity pleas. If one is able to prove that the accused was of unsound mind during the criminal act, they can be acquitted in the case under IPC 84," said Salsingikar.

Role of Forensic Psychology

Forensic psychology is a specific field that combines psychology with the judicial system. It entails using psychological principles and procedures to analyse and resolve challenges in the legal context, notably in criminal situations. Forensic psychologists conduct assessments, give expert testimony, and provide insights into the psychological aspects of judicial cases. Their knowledge is critical in evaluating defendants' mental states, deciding competency to stand trial, and estimating the likelihood of reoffending. By studying psychological aspects, forensic psychologists assist courts in making educated conclusions about persons' mental health and criminal guilt.

In criminal cases involving an insanity plea, forensic psychology plays a vital role. When a defendant claims insanity, forensic psychologists are called upon to evaluate the validity of the claim. Speaking to mid-day.com, Dr Avinash Desousa, Consultant Psychiatrist and Psychotherapist, said, "It is very important that the person pleading insanity is evaluated because sometimes there may be false claims. So, I think a forensic psychologist or a psychiatrist would definitely help to let you know whether, to what extent is the claim genuine or not."

Challenges in assessment

Accurately assessing mental health conditions could pose a challenge since the persons undergoing a trial do face difficulties and social isolation which affect one's mental health while some do feign mental illnesses.

However, Dr Avinash Desousa said that when a person is feigning mental health conditions often relies on the internet and the symptoms they list are usually textual.

"Sometimes, an accused may present signs of mental health illnesses but to determine whether they were of unsound mind during the criminal act is difficult. We can only evaluate them based on how they were when we (mental health professionals) met them," said Dr Desousa and added, "a person feigning mental health illness wouldn't be consistent with their symptoms and it will be mostly textual since they mugged it."

Dr Desousa further added that the healthcare providers cannot totally evaluate an accused with the mindset that they are lying. "They may be having a problem and its intensity could be 50 per cent but they make it out to be 100 per cent. We need to treat them at the same time, take everything that they say with a pinch of salt and evaluate. We'll have to evaluate how much is exaggeration and how much is genuine," he said.

When asked about ethical considerations when working with criminal defendants, Dr Desousa said that they should be treating them as any other patient.

"We treat them as we treat any other patient. We do not look at them as criminals. Their crime doesn't come in the way of them receiving mental health care if needed. The court will convict him for his crime. I am not the judge here to convict him. So that is the important part there," he said.

Impact of insanity plea on criminal trial

When asked about legal standards and procedures are in place to verify the authenticity of mental health claims in criminal cases, Adv Salsingikar, said that when a criminal act is committed following which an accused is arrested, remanded to judicial or police custody - during that period, the accused undergoes a lot of tumultuous emotions and situations.

"If the police do not conduct a proper medical examination and if it does not get properly documented, a plaintiff will not be able to prove their mental health issue caused them to commit a crime. If a person is feigning to get out of sentencing or being convicted, the court does observe everything intricately," he said.

The criminal lawyer said that he once fought a trial of a woman with mental health issues who had murdered her relative. "When the case came to me during trial, I could not take the stance of mental health although she had been undergoing treatment due to lack of proper paper trail establishing the same."

He said if the defendant is able to prove they were mentally unsound at the time of crime, they will be acquitted due to IPC 84 and if a person is convicted and it is later found out that they were mentally unsound throughout trial backed by documents, the judge can take a lenient stance.

In cases of murder, the lenient stance a judge can take is awarding life imprisonment according to the constitution. The insanity plea can be used before announcement of quantum of sentence, he added.

Elaborating on the impact of insanity plea or plea of being mentally unsound on the trial, he said that it does change the direction of the latter.

"When a defendant takes a mental illness stand, the case is redirected and now both - the prosecution and defence parties - have to prove whether the person was really mentally unsound or not since the incident is already proved. Additionally, it is dependent on the judge," he said.

Challenges in mental disorder defence

When asked about challenges when cases have mental health claims involved, he said that enough is not noted about either a victim or a culprit's mental health.

Both the victims and accused go through a lot of things like social isolation, etc, which affects one's mental health and thus it is crucial that their mental health condition is assessed because unless it is done, the court will not be able to understand them. The court and presiding officer also have limitations, he noted.

He also cited that it needs to be looked at whether the mental evaluation was conducted by a probe agency due to pressure on them or not.

Do things need to change?

Adv Salsingikar said it is crucial to focus on mental healthcare in the criminal justice system and that adequate reforms need to be brought since not just during criminal acts, but even after the trial, people need support.

Undergoing a criminal trial and being lodged in jail is an unpleasant experience. A person witnesses a lot happening there while being isolated which affects people. They sometimes end their lives because of the turmoil, Adv Prashant Salsingikar stated and added that all stakeholders must be trained adequately and equipped to take into consideration people's mental health.