Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala: A question of Insanity

Author: Eshwarya Sarraf, Student at West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences

Best Citation – Eshwarya Sarraf, SUDHAKARAN V. STATE OF KERALA: A QUESTION OF INSANITY, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE, 1 (1) of 2023, Pg. 50-54, ISBN (P) – 978-81-960702-2-9.

Abstract

Insanity is one of the most commonly used general defences in Criminal law. To successfully avail the defence of Insanity, one needs to establish that the accused was unable to distinguish between right and wrong or that the accused was unknown of the fact that the act he is committing was either illegal or immoral. Criminal insanity is certainly different from medical insanity, and thus it is possible that a person who is medically insane may be convicted of an offence. In India, Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code provides for the defence of Insanity. In insanity, the accused is unable to form the required Mens Rea, a pre-requisite for any offence punishable under the law. From time to time, there have been various cases where the defence of Insanity has been taken, and there have been some landmark judgements on the same. Courts of various jurisdictions have provided for certain rules which act as guidelines in determining whether the accused could take the defence of Insanity successfully or not. One of the most common guidelines prevalent in India is the M’Naghten’s Test. It is used in a variety of cases pertaining to the question of Insanity. This paper critically analyses the rule of criminal Insanity in India using the landmark case of Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala, which went into a detailed discussion regarding the issue of Insanity. In this case, Court elaborated on the preceding case laws and pronounced its judgement. The paper also talks about the various other tests prevalent in other countries as against the M’Naghten’s Test.