Nagpur: Schizophrenia came to save an accuser who was released by the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court from killing his brother and injuring others.
Expand the interests of the IPC 84 section related to the action by someone with an unhealthy mind, a division bench consisting of Heresian Mahesh Sonak and Pushpa Ganediwala reciprocated and set aside the confidence of Rajendra Chaudhary’s applicant given by the Chandrapur session court on November 15, 2017.
Children aged 51 years Sentenced to life imprisonment for brutal murder and languishing in prison since then.
“Nothing is offended by someone who, when he did, on the grounds of an unhealthy mind, was unable to know the nature of the action, or that he did what was wrong or contrary to the law,” Part 84 reads.
“The prosecution has failed to explain why the applicant will act in this way in the absence of the history of violence or hostility between the brothers.
Contradiction, negligence, and improvement in the material aspects of the argument has been proven after the investigative officer is faced with the same thing.
Therefore, related With all these factors, we think that he has the right to benefit from doubts and release of consequences, “said the bench.
On April 19, 2014, Chaudhary attacked his two brothers with ax when they slept on the terrace along with their families at night.
While one of them died of injury in the head, another painful injury that was sustainable but survived.
After that, Chaudhary caused injury to himself with the same weapon and surrendered before the Virur Police Station in Rajura, Chandrapur, at the same night.
Furthermore, the additional judge punished him under Section 302.
Chaudhary challenged the verdict in HC where he was given a lawyer RD Hajare under the judicial legal assistance scheme when he came from a bad background and was unable to hire advice.
The enormous thing is that it is a fit case where the applicant has the right to protection below Section 84, Hajare said there was a lot of evidence that the Chaudhary for the reason the mind was unable to know the nature of his actions when he did.
“Evidence establishes the history of the Petitioner’s mental illness and the absence of motives and confidentiality.
He has killed his two brothers, who is a close relative.
Although this is also the case of several murders, but most importantly, there is no evidence of the plan that has been arranged before or that he is Have accomplices, “said the judges.
Adding that the evidence on the record is more than enough for the issuance of Onus to the applicant, they say for prosecution leading further evidence in rebuttal.
“Based on the cumulative consideration of the evidence led by prosecution and defense, we are satisfied that this is at least the case where the material on the record creates a reasonable doubt about the mental condition of the applicant at the time of the incident,” The Bench said.
The judges told the police to complete the procedure under section 338 and 339 CRPC where they were asked to state that the defendant would not endanger himself or someone else after being released from prison or he had to be sent to asylum.