The High Court directs Delhi Government to ensure a sufficient number of short and long stay homes for mentally ill inmates.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 15th March, 2023

Decided on: 26th June, 2023

CRL.A. 161/2011

MADHU BALA                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ..... Appellant

Represented by: Ms.Anu Narula, Advocate.

versus

STATE                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..... Respondent

Represented by: Mr.Prithu Garg, APP for the State

with Inspector Vivek, P.S.Dabri. Mr.Tushar Sannu,

Standing Counsel with Ms.Varnalee Mishra and Ms.

Shivangi Singh, Advocates for IHBAS.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE POONAM A.

BAMBA MUKTA GUPTA, J.

1. Present appeal brings forth saga of a woman who for absence of solitude and support ended up not only in jail but for years in the IHBAS. Madhu Bala who was arrested on 22nd September, 2005 in FIR No. 677/2005 and while in judicial custody during trial, the appellant complained of psychiatric problems and thus, the appellant was on follow up at Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences (IHBAS) since 22nd May, 2009. By then, 20 prosecution witnesses had been examined and some of them were even recalled under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) and re-examined on an application filed by the learned amicus curiae. During the trial, an application was received from the Jail Superintendent informing that appellant Madhu Bala was diagnosed to be suffering from Schizophrenia and was undergoing treatment as an outdoor patient at IHBAS. According to the report, during her treatment, she became violent and had to be rushed to IHBAS in emergency on 7th September 2009, where she was admitted as an in-patient. The learned Trial Court thus directed the appellant Madhu Bala to be admitted at IHBAS as an in-patient till further orders and postponed the recording of the evidence. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court sought for a report from the Medical Board of IHBAS as to whether Madhu Bala was fit to stand trial. Vide order dated 3rd February 2010 the learned Trial Court noted that the report of the Medical Board indicated that the appellant was fit to stand trial and thus, the learned Trial Court proceeded with the recording of the evidence of the remaining witnesses. Finally, the prosecution evidence was closed on 30th June, 2010 after examining 40 prosecution witnesses. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 6th July 2010 and she opted not to lead defence evidence. After final arguments, the impugned judgment was pronounced on 21st August, 2010 convicting the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 326 IPC.

Read More