When a person is unable to understand things, he is said to be of unsound

mind. Idiocy, madness, alcoholism, and mental degeneration are all

examples of unsoundness. According to Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, “Nothing constitutes an offence done by a person who, at the time of
committing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of
comprehending the nature of the conduct, or that he is doing what is either
improper or contrary to law”.

In other words, an act committed by a person of unsound mind is not

considered an offence and falls under the category of ‘General Exceptions’.
Here, the caring attitude towards people who are mentally ill is maintained.

CrPC Chapter XXV Sections 328 to 339 makes provisions for accused persons
of unsound mind. These provisions are in the best interests of the mentally
ill.

Criminal proceedings related to unsound mind

The following are the criminal procedures related to a lunatic or an individual
of unsound mind under CrPC –

Section 328– procedure in case of the accused being a

lunatic
According to Section 328 of the Act, if the magistrate believes that the
person being investigated is unable to defend himself or is mentally ill, the
magistrate must guarantee that the subject is evaluated by a medical
professional during the investigation.

If the defendant is unable to defend himself, the magistrate will hear the
prosecution and examine the records.

The magistrate shall postpone the proceeding for a limited term until the
person’s unsoundness is remedied, based on medical proof.

Section 329– procedure where a person of unsound

mind is tried before the court
According to Section 329 of the Act, if the magistrate believes the person
being tried is of sound mind and incapable of self-defence, the magistrate
ensures this by having the subject evaluated by a medical professional. If the
defendant is unable to defend himself, the magistrate will hear the
prosecution and examine the records. The magistrate shall record such a
determination and postpone the hearing based on medical evidence.

The fact of insanity throughout the trial will be considered part of the
proceedings.

Section 330- release of a person of unsound mind

pending investigation or trial
According to Section 330 of the Act, If the person is found unsound or
incapable of making his defence during the inquiry and trial (Sections 328
and 329), regardless of whether the offence is bailable or not, the Court may
release him. In other words, if the offence is non bailable, the magistrate
must grant bail as well. If, on the other hand, bail cannot be granted, the
accused must be kept in a location where he can receive treatment.

Section 331- resumption of inquiry or trial

According to Section 331 of the Act, when the inquiry and trial are postponed
or suspended, the magistrate shall summon the person after he or she
regains mental soundness or ceases to be insane and resume the inquiry and
trial.

Section 332- procedure of accused appearing before

the magistrate or the court
According to Section 332 of the Act, If the accused appears before the
magistrate and the court believes he is capable of presenting his defence, the
investigation and trial will continue.

If the person is still unable to recover from his condition, the provisions of
Section 330 will apply once more.

Section 333- when accused appears to have been of

sound mind
According to Section 333 of the Act, when the magistrate has reason to
believe the individual is of sound mind and there is also evidence that acts
were committed by the accused, when the act was committed by the
accused, and when the act was committed while the accused was of sound
mind. The magistrate will then proceed with the case.

Section 334- judgement of acquittal of the accused on

the ground of unsoundness of mind
According to Section 334 of the Act, if a person is acquitted on the grounds
of insanity and is unable to identify the nature of the act, the findings must
state whether the act was committed by the accused or not.

Section 335- person acquitted on such ground to be

detained in safe custody
According to Section 335 (1) of the Act, if a person is acquitted by a
magistrate on the grounds of insanity, he or she should be detained in safe
custody or should be delivered to a family member or friend.

When it comes to delivering an accused person to a relative or friend, the

court can only do so if the relative or friend makes an application to the
magistrate and the friend or relative assures the court of security.

Responsibilities of a relative or friend

 He must take proper care of that individual.
 When necessary, the relative or friend should present that person
for inspection as directed by the state government.

Section 336- the power of state government to

empower officer in charge to discharge
According to Section 336 of the Act, the State Government may delegate all
or all of the functions of the Inspector-General of Prisons under Section
337 or Section 338 to the official in charge of the jail in which a person is
imprisoned under the provisions of section 330 or section 335.
Section 337- procedure where the lunatic prisoner is
reported capable of making his defence
According to Section 337 of the Act, the magistrate must proceed with
Section 332 if it is determined that the lunatic is now capable of defending
himself.

Section 338- procedure where a lunatic detained is

declared fit to be released
According to Section 338 of the Act, if a person is detained under Section
330 on the grounds of insanity and the authorised person or inspector
general certifies that the person is fit to be released, detained by the
authorities, transferred to a public mental institution then there should be no
damage in doing so and the government may then release the individual.

If a person is committed to a public mental institution, a commission must be

formed to conduct an official investigation into their mental health and issue
a report, which must be sent to the state government.

Section 339- delivery of lunatic to the care of relative

or friend
According to Section 339 of the Act, if a person’s relative or friend wishes for
the person to be released to him, the relative or friend must apply to the
State Government for such a release.

The State Government will only accept such an application or grant the
request if the person delivers :-

 Properly cared for without causing harm to himself or others

 Produced for inspection when necessary
 Produced before a magistrate when necessary
When the accused is able to defend himself, the accused’s relative or friend
is summoned, and a certificate of inspection is kept as evidence.
Notable case laws related to person of
unsound mind

State of Maharashtra v. Sindhi (1975)

In this case, the Court held that the accused could not be declared to be
incapable of defending himself because he was fully aware of the nature of
the crime he had committed and the proceedings against him. The specialist
has been called to ensure mental insanity. The High Court carefully
considered their testimony before recording its own conclusions on the key
issues.

I.V. Shivaswamy v. State of Mysore (1971)

In this case, the Court ruled that the investigation will be conducted only if
the magistrate is satisfied that the accused is insane or of unsound mind.
However, if there is no possibility of unsoundness, such an investigation will
not take place. In the event of a doubt, an investigation is required.

Conclusion
It can be concluded that such provisions are in the best interests of those
who are mentally ill and incapable of self-defence. During the period of his
insanity, the magistrate has the authority to postpone the trial or
procedures.

After he has recovered his health or is capable of defending himself, the

court will proceed as if he is of sound mind. Such a person must be
maintained in a secure environment or in safe custody. A relative or
acquaintance of that person may file a petition to the magistrate for release
if that person is mentally ill. We can see the court’s concern for the mentally
ill in this case. Such provisions are required to achieve proper justice.

Mental health care act 2017

Chapter 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) outlines procedures for

individuals of unsound mind involved in criminal proceedings, ensuring their
fair treatment and protection. It focuses on assessing mental capacity,
delaying trials if necessary, and releasing or detaining individuals based on
their mental health status. The provisions aim to balance justice and the
well-being of the mentally ill, aligning with the compassionate approach
advocated in the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. This Act emphasizes rights,
treatment, and dignified living for individuals with mental illness, promoting
access to mental healthcare, advance directives, establishment regulations,
and decriminalizing suicide. Both Chapter 25 of CrPC and the Mental
Healthcare Act prioritize the rights and appropriate care of those with mental
health issues, safeguarding their well-being within legal frameworks.
Section 464 - Effect of omission
to frame charge or to specify the
offense:
Section 464 deals with the
omission to frame a charge or to
specify the offense properly in
the
charge. It states that an omission
to frame a charge, or any error or
irregularity in the charge,
shall not be deemed to be a
material irregularity unless it has
caused substantial prejudice to
the accused's defense.
Section 465 - Finding or
sentence, not to be set aside for
error, omission, or irregularity:
Section 465 provides that no
finding, sentence, or order passed
by a court of competent
jurisdiction shall be set aside
solely on the grounds of any
error, omission, or irregularity in
the
proceedings, unless the error,
omission, or irregularity has
caused a failure of justice