By Shreya Sehgal
The forensic psychiatry is that branch of psychiatric which requires specialise knowledge in laws related to mental state of the alleged defendant at the time of offence. And due to this specialise knowledge only they are called to give their expert opinion. In recent times the need of psychiatric expert opinion has increased as result we see growing role in the justice system. This brings us to our question as to Are psychiatric expert opinion relevant and whether they are admissible or not? The answer to this question is that relevancy of the psychiatric expert opinion depends on the knowledge the Psychiatric expert opinion mediates and with this being relevant the psychiatric expert opinion can be admitted based on their qualification and relevancy.
The interface of psychiatric expert opinion and laws are seen when any defence is taken up about mental health and insanity is taken up by the alleged defendant as a private defence. In recent times psychiatric is called a lot of times to the court for various matters like fitness to stand trial, insanity defence, ability to make contract, custody of child, child sexual abuse case, negligence tec. Are some areas wherein Psychiatric expert opinion is taken up. Hence shows the importance of Psychiatric expert opinion in order to decide the case and to ensure veracity of the defence taken up.
Psychiatric branch helps in decoding the mental health condition of the alleged defendant. It is the general assumption that the psychiatric have the skill and education which makes them competent to give their expert opinion in the court. This NIMHANS Detailed Workup Proforma for Forensic Psychiatry Patients-II is used in the Institute since many decades for semi-structured assessment of forensic psychiatric cases. And this helps in assessment of insanity and mental health illness as defence taken up by the accused.[1]
Further in criminal law 'Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea' is the basic principle which means an act does not make a person guilty unless there is a guilty mind. And hence is any alleged defendant has done an act without any element of Mens rea and have done it under influence of any mental health disorder or insanity in order to assess the defence and make a rationale from its expert opinion is brought to the court to check truthfulness of the defence taken up by the alleged accused. Indian laws have recognized such need of expert opinion and accordingly have made provision in order to ensure fair justice system in India.
ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH PROBLEM:
ADMISSIBILITY OF PSYCHIATRIC EXPERT OPINION DURING TRIAL FOR INSANITY AND MENTAL HEALTH DEFENCE:
It’s important to understand what exactly is an expert opinion? Under section 45 of Indian evidence act states that opinion of experts is relevant when there arises question about foreign law, science, art, identity, handwriting or finger impressions. In order to answer all these questions an expert who has specialised skills and knowledge in any of these respective field is call in the court in order to check veracity of the claims made by. Section 45 is an exception the general rule that except opinion of judge’s other opinion are irrelevant but this section 45 makes the expert opinion relevant and hence when something is relevant it is admissible as well only when connect with direct evidences to the case i.e., forming a chain of links as to relevant facts that are to be proved by the expert opinion and how from section 45-51 opinions are relevant. In order to understand whether opinion of expert is relevant or not following conditions are to be looked after:
1. That the subject is of that nature that there is a need of expert testimony.
2. Witness is question is an expert.
Hence if these both criteria are fulfilled that means the expert opinion is relevant though can be challenged and be proved by cross-examination.
Next its important for the expert to come to the court by itself and give his opinion unless he is been permitted to submit a report like medical report etc. There are various areas where expert opinion can be taken like for insanity defence, to determine mental health, age of parties, injury, handwriting etc. as all these field requires immense knowledge.
Hence in all expert opinion is relevant and admissible but it’s not a conclusive proof in order to determine the alleged accused guilt it just act as a corroboration with other evidences. And hence the Judge can either admit or reject the opinion based on it won discretion.
In case of Forest Range officer v. P. Mohammad Ali[2], herein the court held that expert opinion is only opinion evidence, it does not help court in any form of interpretation and is not binding upon the court. Hence this shows admissibility of evidence is upon court discretion.
Along the same line psychiatric expert opinion is taken in order to determine whether defence taken up by the alleged accused based on insanity and mental health is true or not. The same is verified by the court through psychiatric expert opinion in court making it relevant under section 45 of Indian evidence act as this comes under the criteria of science and medical to determine mental health and insanity of alleged accused and on discretion of court it would be either admitted or denied since the court will only consider such psychiatric expert opinion till it supports and is connected to direct evidence. With such psychiatric expert opinion, the evidentiary value of claim made by alleged accused can be increased if in its favour since psychiatric expert opinion would have major knowledge on this field and his testimony will increase the credibility of the defence taken.
When we question as to why we need a psychiatric expert opinion it leads us to the answer that how there exits a difference between legal and medical capacity i.e., a person maybe mentally ill but is legally capable of doing the act or may not be mentally ill yet for specific transaction be ill. Now when such situation arises answer to such question as to whether person at time of commission of offence was mentally ill or not can’t be left alone to be answered by the judge itself due to no specialised knowledge on the same and hence this is how need for psychiatric expert opinion arises due to their immense knowledge in this field. With help of psychiatric expert opinion, it will help the judge to arrive at the conclusion for easily as with help of this other evidences given and defence taken up by the alleged accused can be corroborated and its evidentiary value be increased.
Next when it comes to the defence of insanity following issues are to be looked at 1. Whether accused was of unsound mind at time of commission of offence 2. Whether person by reason was incapable to know nature of offence. Issues in accordance od mental health defence is 1. State of mind at the time of commission of offence 2. Is mental health in such condition which affects decision making process. All these are answered by the expert opinion.
As per McNaughten Rule upon insanity which is also highlighted in section 94 of IPC wherein a medical witness who has been called in court he could be asked about matter related to science as to whether defence of insanity or mental health taken up by the accused is right or wrong. A qualified expert may testify as to talk about mental condition of the accused this could be done either by examination or testimony. Not only this an expert can be asked situation-based question not directly connected to facts so as to develop an understanding whether insanity or mental health condition at time of commission of offence can be an actual defence or not.
Hence based on this section it can be said that expert opinion in order to determine whether insanity and mental health defence taken up by the accused is right or not is allowed and is relevant as in criminal justice the accused has to show that act by him was done in influence of a mental condition and in order to substantiate his defence expert opinion is required not necessary be admitted as it depends on court discretion as it is a matter of convenience though not as matter of right.
There have been various cases in which Supreme Court has interpreted role of psychiatric expert opinion when insanity and mental health defence is taken. In case of Deo Rao v. Emperor, court held that under section 45 of Indian Evidence act expert opinion as to matter of science is relevant wherein question is upon unsound mind at time of the commission of offence in India where trail is with the aid to assessors by a session judge. And hence, opinion of expert in medical disease is relevant i.e., in matter related to insanity or any mental diseases. Herein the court held that the accused herein due to unsoundness of mind could not know nature of offence and can’t tell whether was wrong as per legal sanity under section 84. [3]
Hence this case shows that expert opinion as to tell on insanity or any medical decease which is part of mental health since this term is broader enough to include medical disease term in it.
After this came the case of Baswant Rao vs. Emperor court held that an expert can furnish court with facts or data so connected with insanity and held that though court accepted previous judgment defence of insanity does not mean same logic be applied everywhere.[4]
In the case of Devidas Loka Rathod v. State of Maharashtra, Supreme court said that appellant, who was from poor background and could not expect them to know about or maintain medical records or expert evidences and hence it is important to subject accused to a mental health evaluation in these cases to know whether person was of unsound mind at time of incident or not.[5]
Hence with all this it can be said that in India psychiatric expert medical opinion is not taken as conclusive proof and it’s on court’s discretion whether to accept it or deny it. And also, its on the Judge’s discretion as to send alleged accused who has taken defence of insanity or mental health to psychiatric or not and if send then the court must analyse the report by psychiatric properly as an important evidence and failure of Judge to send accused to psychiatric would be seen as important factor for accused acquittal along with looking at his plea of insanity or mental health at time of commission of offence. Hence, expert opinion is admissible if relevant so as to evaluation of accused guilt can be done.
PSYCHIATRIC EXPERT OPINION INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT: LEGAL PROVISIONS:
As since how psychiatric expert opinion in India is relevant and admissible there is also an international approach towards psychiatric expert opinion as per United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (C.R.P.D.) it states about more wider recognition of people with mental disabilities and their legal capacity and able to extend it to criminal acts and hence when any defence of insanity or metal condition is taken being part of criminal acts expert opinion be taken to recognize the defence.
As per English law expert opinion is taken where as a necessity wherein defence of insanity is taken as it becomes necessary for an expert to access if the accused was suffering from insanity at time of the commission of the offence. In the case of R v Weightman it was stated that:
"... the principle to be learnt from the cases, notably the case of Turner, is that a psychiatrists evidence is inadmissible where its purpose is in effect to tell a jury how a person who is not suffering from mental illness is likely to react to the stresses and strains in life."[8]
Hence this shows that how even at international level under English law as well expert opinion is relevant and admissible when the experts states about mental conditions like insanity was the reason why accused did the act and won’t be relevant if the act was done in stress such expert opinion are irrelevant.
RECOMMEDATIONS:
In India now what required is to make a specific section for psychiatric expert opinion as to get clarity on its relevancy and admissibility as in recent times need for psychiatric expert opinion has increased a lot, next what require is for proper interpretation of knowing and understanding difference between legal and mental capacity so as to evaluate the defence taken up by the accused.
For determining accused guilt psychiatric expert opinion must be taken into relevance and be made admissible if without any undue influence and be consider as one of the major factors for acquittal.
Another thing to look after is that psychiatric expert opinion to be admitted or not depends on court discretion and hence its important to know that Judge as very limited knowledge on the said subject matter and leaving this decision on the Judge to admit the expert opinion or not would be a disadvantage to the accused who has no mens rea involved while doing the act and hence what needed is proper laws set on this matter.
CONCLUSION:
Hence psychiatric expert opinion is one taken in India when defence of insanity and mental health is taken by the accused, such expert opinion are relevant and can be made admissible based on judge’s discretion. Usually in India evidentiary value of psychiatric expert opinion when insanity defence and mental health defence is taken is low and mainly used for corroboration purpose and not see and independent evidence. This act as a limitation and what is needed is a proper provision and clarity on the same as to how to interpret expert opinion of psychiatric in mental health and insanity defence. Justice as always been the aim of judiciary and in order to provide justice what becomes important is to ensure each and every evidence is carefully scrutinized and therefore when expert opinion of a psychiatric is look after during insanity and mental health defence by alleged accused it becomes the rule for the judge to check the relevancy and upon facts of the case see whether to admit it or not and while doing so look into the accuracy and reliability of the psychiatric expert opinion to derive at a conclusion.
Hence in India we see a great interplay of psychiatric and law when such insanity and mental health defence is taken. The judge evaluates such expert opinion more carefully as here in question is about mental capacity of the accused and not legal capacity of the accused and in such matters where mental state of accused is in question evaluation of expert opinion is though relevant be admitted only when found reliable. Therefore, this is the admissibility of expert opinion in mental health and insanity defence and evidentiary value.
The author of this article is Shreya Sehgal, a third-year BALLB student at Institute of Law, Nirma University.
[1] Math SB, Kumar CN, Moirangthem S. Insanity Defense: Past, Present, and Future. Indian J Psychol Med. 2015 Oct-Dec;37(4):381-7. doi: 10.4103/0253-7176.168559. PMID: 26702167; PMCID: PMC4676201.
[2] 1994 AIR 120, 1993 SCR (3) 497.
[3] A.I.R. 1946 Nag. 321.
[4] A.I.R. 1949 Nag. 66.
[5] Devidas Loka Rathod v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 7 SCC 718 (‘Devidas’).
[6] R v Weightman [1991] 92 Cr App R 291, p. 297
References:
Sepaha , N. (2021) ‘Psychiatric Expert Opinion: Admissibility and Relevancy ’, Law Colloquy Journal of Legal Studies (LCJLS) , 1(1), pp. 1–9.
Channaveerachari NK;Manjunatha N;Mukesh J;Damodharan D;Dass GP;, N.; Narayana; Jagiwala; Dinakaran; Garg (2022) The psychiatrist as an expert witness, Indian journal of psychiatry.
Math SB, Kumar CN, Moirangthem S. Insanity Defense: Past, Present, and Future. Indian J Psychol Med. 2015 Oct-Dec;37(4):381-7. doi: 10.4103/0253-7176.168559. PMID: 26702167; PMCID: PMC4676201.
AK, S., Misra, M. and Surendranath, A. (2021) ‘SHAPESHIFTING AND ERRONEOUS: THE MANY INCONSISTENCIES IN THE INSANITY DEFENCE IN INDIA’, SHAPESHIFTING AND ERRONEOUS: THE MANY INCONSISTENCIES IN THE INSANITY DEFENCE IN INDIA , 14, pp. 2–22.
Ramamurthy P, Chathoth V, Thilakan P. How does India Decide Insanity Pleas? A Review of High Court Judgments in the Past Decade. Indian J Psychol Med. 2019 Mar-Apr;41(2):150-154. doi: 10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_373_18. PMID: 30983663; PMCID: PMC6436411.
This article contains the view of the author and the publisher in no way associates with the views or ideologies of the author. All the moral rights vests with the Author(s).