Lunatic

2015 PCrLJ 361 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 302Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 464 & 539Qatl-i-amdLunaticDeterminationReport of Medical BoardAccused claimed to be suffering with schizophrenic illness and filed application for declaring him as lunaticValidity

Mere determination by Jail Medical Officer about unsoundness of mind of accused had no meaning as he was residing in jail and there was a possibility that he had influenced Jail Medical Officer for declaring him unfit for trial

Report firstly submitted by Medical Board was not proper in its form and court had rightly directed the Board to resubmit the same and the Board on the basis of first examination conducted in respect of accused had submitted report later on, treating accused fit for facing trial

When first report was not signed by all members of Medical Board, then it could not be that opinion given by all members was correct and all agreed with the same

Medical Board was not facing pressure of institution of contempt petition and did not change its view

Accused alleged his sickness prior to occurrence and his admission in hospitals and receiving treatment from different Medical Officers but no proof of such treatment was appended with application for examination of court, as such the same showed malice on the part of accused to have wrongful gain by declaring him unfit to stand trial

Plea of unsoundness of mind was raised at belated stage which also did not inspire confidence and cast serious doubt upon bona fide of accused

Revision was dismissed in circumstances.

2015 CLC 566 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 42Suit for declarationLunaticSuit filed through next friendPlaintiff challenged transfer of his property through registered sale-deed by his brother as attorney

Plaintiff claimed that he was lunatic at the time of execution of alleged power of attorney on the basis of which the transfer of property through sale deed was made and as such the same was invalid

Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff, which was set aside by Appellate Court

Tenant of the suit property filed suit for pre-emption which was decreed in his favour, thereafter the plaintiff filed present suit

Attorney and vendees were deleted from the array of defendants before the Trial Court

Validity

Attorney and vendees had been deleted from the array of defendants which meant that the power of attorney as well as sale deed in favour of vendees had been impliedly admitted

If power of attorney and sale deed in favour of vendee was not admitted then without impleading them as party no decree could have been passed by the Trial Court

Findings recorded by the Trial Court were not sustainable

Appellate Court had rightly reversed the same

Revision petition was dismissed.

2015 CLC 566 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 42Lunacy Act (IV of 1912), S.62Suit for declarationLunaticSuit was filed through wife being next friend of lunaticMaintainability of suit filed on behalf of lunaticRequirements

Declaration of lunacy and inquiry was required, which was to be conducted by the District Court but no such procedure had been adopted before filing the suit

Without adopting the procedure the suit filed by the next friend who was wife of the plaintiff showing him lunatic was not permissible

Failure to follow special procedure as provided for declaration of lunacy rendered the suit incompetent.

2012 PCrLJ 1328 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 466 & 465Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302Qatl-e-amdLunatic

Application moved by the accused under S.466, Cr.P.C. for his release on the ground that he being of unsound mind was unable to make his defence, had been dismissed by Trial Court vide the impugned order

According to the report of the Consultant Psychiatrist, accused was suffering from "bipolar affective disorder"

Said ailment connoted two different conditions of the patient, in one condition he is a normal person, but in the other condition when he experiences a fit, he loses control over his mind and may become dangerous for himself and others

Person under such a fit cannot defend himself, but once he is out of it, he behaves normally and rationally and becomes conscious of his gains and losses

Accused might be in the manic phase at the time of his examination, but a statement made by him before a Magistrate regarding a compromise in a private complaint had clearly revealed that he was mentally fit and fully understood the nature of the statement made by him

Opinion of Trial Court had its own significance under S.465, Cr.P.C. and it is required to try the fact of unsoundness or incapacity only if it arrives at the conclusion that the accused is of unsound mind and is incapable of making his defence

Observations made by Trial Court after having seen the accused in the court could not be brushed aside merely due to the fact that Psychiatrist had given a different opinion, because the opinion of Trial Court had been confirmed by the aforesaid sane and rational statement of the accused

Impugned order did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity

Petition was dismissed accordingly; however, if at any stage of the trial, Trial Court was satisfied that due to recurrence of the ailment accused had become incapable to make his defence, it might refer him to the Institute of Mental Health for examination by a competent Board and then decide the matter afresh.