CRLA/440/2021
2023 Latest Caselaw 2529 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.           or proceedings
      Date                                             COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No           or directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                 CRLA No. 440 of 2021
                                 With
                                 IA No. 3 of 2023 (Miscellaneous Application)
                                 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mrs. Pushpa Joshi (Senior Advocate), learned Amicus curiae with Ms. Manisha Bhandari, Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Mr. Dhruv Chandra and Ms. Lovely Grover (through V.C.), Advocates for the appellant.

2. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. Mr. B.D. Jha, learned counsel for the complainant (through V.C.).

4. Appellant has been awarded death penalty vide order dated 05.10.2021 passed by learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2015, upon his conviction for offence punishable under Sections 302, 307 & 316 IPC. The death sentence has been referred to this Court under Section 366 Cr.P.C. for confirmation.

Misc. Application (IA No. 4 of 2023)

5. IA No. 3 of 2023 is moved on behalf of the appellant seeking direction to respondents to constitute a team of experts for psychological evaluation of the appellant/applicant, with IA No. 4 of 2023, seeking exemption from requirement of filing affidavit.

6. Having regard to the fact that the appellant/applicant is lodged in jail, therefore, prayer for exemption from requirement of filing affidavit is allowed. Accordingly, Miscellaneous Application (IA No. 4 of 2023) stands disposed of.

Misc. Application (IA No. 3 of 2023)

7. Learned counsel for appellant/applicant submits that applicant had a very disturbed childhood; he had traumatic experiences since early childhood, and his overall demeanour is not normal and there is abnormality in his walk, incoherent talk, therefore, applicant needs a thorough psychological and mental assessment by a team of doctors. It is further stated that he is unaware of his surroundings and personal hygiene. It is further stated that applicant was earlier examined by Dr. Surender Dhaliwal, Assistant Professor, Clinical Psychology, Doon Medical College, Dehradun, and Dr. Dhaliwal had opined that reality testing capacity of applicant is impaired and various other abnormalities were also found in his behaviour.

8. Learned counsel for appellant/applicant has placed reliance upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manoj and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 2 SCC 353 and order dated 19.10.2022 passed in Prakash Vishwanath Darandale v. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 425-426 of 2020). Reliance is also placed upon Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684. The judgment rendered in the case of Manoj and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra) is reproduced below:-

"249. To do this, the trial court must elicit information from the accused and the State, both. The State, must-for an offence carrying capital punishment-at the appropriate stage, produce material which is preferably collected beforehand, before the Sessions Court disclosing psychiatric and psychological evaluation of the accused. This will help establish proximity (in terms of timeline), to the accused person's frame of mind (or mental illness, if any) at the time of committing the crime and offer guidance on mitigating factors (1), (5), (6) and (7) spelled out in Bachan Singh, (1980) 2 SCC 684. Even for the other factors of (3) and (4) in the Bachan Singh list-an onus placed squarely on the State-conducting this from the psychiatric and psychological evaluation close on the heels of commission of the offence, will provide a baseline for the appellate courts to use for comparison i.e. to evaluate the progress of the accused towards reformation, achieved during the incarceration period."

9. Learned State Counsel fairly submits that appellant was examined by a psychologist doctor during trial and he remained hospitalised for his psychological evaluation from 27.01.2021 to 12.02.2021; he has also taken us to the relevant paragraphs of the impugned judgment where testimony of Dr. Surender Dhaliwal, Assistant Professor, Clinical Psychology has been considered and discussed.

10. Be that as it may, since appellant has been awarded death penalty and during trial also, he was examined by a psychologist to ascertain whether he suffers from any mental/psychological disorder, therefore, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to allow the prayer made for psychological evaluation of appellant/applicant.

11. In such view of the matter, we allow Miscellaneous Application (IA No. 3 of 2023) and direct the Inspector General, Prison, Uttarakhand to arrange for production of appellant-Harmeet Singh before Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, within two weeks from today. We request Director, AIIMS, Rishikesh to constitute a team of not less than three experts; in the relevant branch of Psychiatry/Psychology to evaluate the mental/psychological health of appellant, if need be, by admitting him as an indoor patient for such period, as is deemed necessary. The team of experts before submitting report, shall consider the findings recorded in earlier report of psychological experts, who examined the appellant/ applicant. This Court, hopes and expects that report of the assessment/ evaluation of appellant/ applicant, shall be produced before this Court, in a sealed cover, within six weeks from today.

12. Registry is directed to communicate this order to Inspector General, Prison, Uttarakhand forthwith.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 28.08.2023 PN