The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has acquitted a man who was sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court in Tiruchi in a murder case taking into account that on the day of the incident the accused was not in a normal state of mind.

A Division Bench of Justices N. Anand Venkatesh and P.B. Balaji said the manner in which the accused had acted violently while killing the deceased clearly established that he was of unsound mind.

In such circumstances, the accused was entitled to the exception provided under Section 84 (act of a person of unsound mind) of the IPC, and he could not be charged of offences under Section 302 (murder) of IPC or even Section 506 (ii) of IPC (criminal intimidation), the court said.

The court was hearing the appeal filed by the man against the judgment of Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiruchi. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering another man in a gruesome manner in 2016.

The court said the medical records clearly indicated that the accused was suffering from bipolar affective disorder mania with psychotic symptoms. The records additionally indicated that the accused was undergoing treatment at various hospitals, including the Institute of Mental Health, Chennai. He was taking treatment at the IMH in view of the relapse of symptoms in 2023 and again in 2024.

However, in the trial court’s judgment, there was absolutely no reference to his mental health. The court had been put on notice about the insanity of the accused. Unfortunately, it had been totally insensitive to such mitigating and relevant factors, the High Court said.

It said right from the date of commission of the murder, the accused had been found to be mentally unstable. Even during the trial, he was undergoing treatment. The court said the very manner in which the accused went about attacking and killing the deceased, left no room for doubt that he was certainly of unsound mind, not knowing the nature of the act and its consequences.

After all, the letter and spirit of Section 84 of the IPC were to not treat as offences acts done by a person of unsound mind, the court said.

The court directed the Dean/ Director of the IMH, Chennai, to ensure that the appellant was given proper care and treatment. If after such treatment, the IMH was of the firm opinion that the appellant had recovered and was fit to rejoin his family members, then, liberty was granted to the family members of the appellant to approach the competent authority seeking custody.

The court said it would also like to remind the trial courts that in all cases where the court was put on notice or came to know of any mental unsoundness of the accused, it was the duty of the trial court to ensure that the accused was medically examined and a medical report was obtained from the competent mental health institute/hospital.

The court should assess the report and render a finding as to whether the accused would be entitled to the benefit of IPC Section 84, even in cases where no specific plea of mental unsoundness had been taken by the defence, when such fact had otherwise been brought to the notice of the court trying the case, the court said.