Open Access Research Article
DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY IN INDIA: BEYOND THE WHITE AND BLACK OF GUILT AND INNOCENCE
Published Paper
Article Details
DIMINISHED
RESPONSIBILITY IN INDIA:
BEYOND THE
WHITE AND BLACK OF GUILT AND INNOCENCE
AUTHORED BY – SUHANI RASTOGI &
LAREINA LEO
ABSTRACT
The paper critically examines India's
current legal framework on diminished responsibility and contends that, while
they address the accused's mental state, the laws are ambiguous,
susceptible to interpretation, and fail to account for all complexities of
mental health when it comes to criminal culpability. We contrast foreign mental
health legislation, the UK’s Homicide Act, and the Nallathangal syndrome
precedent in Madras. We explore how various legal frameworks provide more
precise regulations for evaluation and an additional nuanced approach to
reduced accountability. When proposing reforms, the paper recommends for
explicit legal definitions and procedures, as well as the inclusion of expert
opinions from mental health doctors, to give a more effective legal response to
cases of reduced responsibility. To promote an equitable and just legal system
in India, the study emphasizes the importance of raising awareness and revising
legislation to reflect changing attitudes towards mental health.
Keywords –
Diminished responsibility, Mental health, Criminal law, Nallathangal Syndrome,
Homicide Act, Insanity as a defence
INTRODUCTION TO THE CONCEPT
The legal doctrine known as
“diminished responsibility” recognizes the complex relationship that exists
between criminal responsibility and mental health. This concept, which stems
from the premise that not everyone can make logical decisions at all times,
seeks to provide a more nuanced response to instances in which a person's
mental health and disturbances may have influenced their responsibility for
committing a crime.
In different legal countries, the
idea of decreased capacity operates differently. It may either invalidate a
specific element of the accused crime, so exonerating the offender from that
allegation. Alternatively, it may formally decrease the severity of the crime
for which the accused can be found guilty and sentenced, even if all the formal
requirements of the initially alleged offense were met. [1]
Diminished responsibility permits a
more sympathetic and less rigid assessment of an accused person’s mental
stability at the time of committing an offense, as opposed to enforcing a
strict black-and-white picture of guilt or innocence. The complex dynamics at
play in court proceedings involving diminished responsibility require a closer
analysis due to the influence of cultural elements, pervasive stigmas, and
societal biases.
CURRENT LEGAL LANDSCAPE
The term and concept of “Diminished
Responsibility” has not been explicitly discussed or laid down in any of the
sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, there exist provisions that
address the frame of mind of the person at the time of committing the crime. It
is important to consider these since they provide a groundwork for the
discourse on Diminished responsibility in Indian law.
Under Section 300 of the IPC [2],
which defines the ingredients and exceptions Culpable Homicide amounting to
Murder, none of the exceptions discuss diminished responsibility. Instead, when
the accused is of an unsound or abnormal state of mind at the time of
commission of the offence, they must turn to Section 84 [3],
which establishes a defence on the grounds of an unsound mind, absolving the
person of liability under the IPC. [4]
Additionally, a person can also plead under Section 85 of the IPC, if they are
intoxicated “against (their) will” or “without (their) knowledge”. [5]
The IPC’s rules are rather limited and do not fully deal with the nuances of
mental health problems in relation to criminal liability. Diminished
responsibility is not specifically recognized or defined by law as a defence in
criminal cases in India. There may be discrepancies in how these laws are
applied by various courts and jurisdictions, which could affect how mental
health issues are handled in criminal cases.
Homicide Act (The
United Kingdom)
The initial substantial examination
of diminished responsibility by English authorities occurred in the
mid-twentieth century, during the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment
(1949–1953). This commission deliberated on the prospect of incorporating the
Scottish law into the legal framework of England and Wales. The clause
addressing diminished responsibility appears to have been non-controversial and
was enacted into law with the passage of the Homicide Act 1957. [6]
The 1957 Act stipulated that if a defendant accused of murder had an
'abnormality of mind' that 'substantially' impaired their 'mental
responsibility' for the act, they would be held accountable for manslaughter
instead. [7]
In Section 2 of the Act, it was
outlined that the defence bore the burden of proving diminished responsibility.
If successful, a defendant pleading diminished responsibility would be found
guilty of manslaughter instead of murder, with the sentencing left to the
discretion of the court. The section specified that the necessary 'abnormality
of mind' must stem from 'arrested or retarded development of mind' or 'any
inherent causes' or be 'induced by disease or injury.' The applicability of
diminished responsibility was (and continues to be) narrowly limited to cases
involving murder. [8]
Diminished responsibility, as
stipulated by the Homicide Act in the United Kingdom, is a legal principle that
injects a degree of intricacy and empathy into the criminal justice system.
This provision plays a vital role in acknowledging the unequal responsibility
individuals may bear for their actions, particularly in cases where mental
health issues or abnormalities are factors. Due to the Coroners and Justice Act
2009, there have been amendments to the law of diminished responsibility. The
updated law states that diminished responsibility can be considered when a
killing is attributed to an 'abnormality of mental functioning' resulting from
a 'recognized medical condition,' substantially impairing the defendant's
'ability' to comprehend the nature of their actions, make rational judgments,
or exercise self-control. Additionally, the 'abnormality' should provide an
explanation for the defendant's involvement in or commission of the killing. [9]
Considering the mandatory life
sentence for first-degree murder, a successful plea of diminished
responsibility would still serve as a mechanism to introduce sentencing
discretion, similar to the provisions outlined in the originally drafted
Section 2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957. Permitting defendants to provide proof of
an "abnormality of mind" that significantly hinders their mental
functions during the commission of the offense allows for a more personalized
and equitable evaluation of their culpability. Moreover, diminished
responsibility serves to alleviate the potential for injustice by providing a
route to justice that takes into account the intricate relationship between
mental health and criminal conduct. Essentially, diminished responsibility
embodies a delicate balance between accountability and empathy, contributing to
a legal framework in the UK that is more just and compassionate.
Nallathangal
Syndrome (Madras)
The term “Nallathangal syndrome”
derives from the Nallathangal ballad, an age-old work of Tamil literature. This
ballad tells the poignant story of a wealthy woman facing overwhelming
hardships, experiencing profound and agonizing misery due to unexpected
poverty. In an attempt to escape this suffering, she tragically takes her own
life along with her children. [10]
The term was first used by the Madras High Court, who coined it in the year
1989. This concept is considered to be the Indian equivalent of the English
legal concept of Battered Woman Syndrome. [11]
In the case Suyambukkani v. State of
T.N., [12]
the accused woman, unable to endure the harsh treatment from her husband,
leaped into a well with her children. While the children did not survive, she
did. She faced charges for both murder and attempted suicide. The Madras High
Court said that the Nallathangal ballad has generated a tendency for imitation
among women, and the syndrome remains widespread among them. The court held
that while pre-meditation is present, there was evidently no malicious intent.
In their view, the drastic act of family suicide involving the mother and her
children constitutes an excusing circumstance comparable to those specified in
the Exceptions to Section 300 of the IPC. Consequently, when the mother
survives and the children perish, it is to be considered as an exception, categorizing
the offense as one punishable under Section 304 of the IPC.
Following this judgement, the
Guwahati High Court overturned murder charges in a similar case [13],
and instead reduced the sentence of the accused to culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. Legal interpretations of the Nallathangal syndrome have
evolved over time, reflecting a more sophisticated understanding of the
intricate dynamics involved. This history shows a change in the law toward the
recognition of extenuating circumstances in cases of significant family
hardship.
Mental Health
Legislation
The Mental Healthcare Act [14]
was passed by the Indian government in the year 2017. This was done to repeal
the original mental health legislation existing in the country, which was
criticized for being narrow in scope and inadequate for addressing the concerns
of mental health. The legislation outlines the method and steps to be adhered
to concerning the admission, treatment, and release of individuals with mental
illness. This appears to be an approach where Indian courts and the parliament
are promoting a more holistic and empathetic viewpoint of the mental disorders
that a person might be suffering from. This is helpful in our discussion on the
importance of recognizing the state of mind of the accused as a mitigating
factor while awarding the punishment for the offence committed, such as murder,
assault etc.
The civil facets of mental health
care, including as admissions, treatment plans, and discharge procedures, are
mostly governed by mental health laws. The Indian Penal Code and other relevant
criminal legislation govern the legal evaluation of diminished responsibility
in criminal proceedings. The 2017 Act does not delve into or even mention the
concept of diminished liability. That does not undermine the importance of
recognizing the widespread relevance of mental health in court cases while, at
the same time, attempting to alleviate the stigma surrounding the conversation
of psychological well-being.
SOCIAL PARADIGMS AND LEGAL
CHALLENGES
In patriarchal societies, such as the
prevailing one in India, inflexible, polarized, and hierarchical gender roles
contribute to a robust normative connection between gender and the handling of
individuals accused of violent crimes like homicide. Unlike many common law
countries that have witnessed a social shift towards making criminal laws more
gender-sensitive by incorporating the perspectives of battered women, India's
situation remains distinct. [15]
In South Asia, women are not
socialized or conditioned to exhibit aggression. Instead, traits like
submissiveness, docility, obedience, and a non-questioning approach are
instilled, often under the pretext of showing respect and love for the
hierarchical, patriarchal, and autocratic family structure. Moreover, the
handling of domestic violence cases raises concerns. Terms like 'mediation,' 'counselling,'
'compromise,' 'adjustment,' 'conciliation,' and 'settlement' define the
language and shape the legal process. Women's conditioning, including their
perceived inability to assert agency, financial dependence, socialization as
sacrificial family figures, and docility, is often disregarded. Instead, their
submissive roles as wives and homemakers are sometimes idealized in marital
relationships.[16]
In a society where more often than
not the victim will be blamed, it may be hard to introduce this concept of
diminished responsibility, howsoever necessary it may be. This is not the case
just in India, as in a myriad of cases from overseas, similar observations were
made.
In R. v. Malott, Justice Claire
L’Heureux Dubé accurately observes that:
“By emphasizing a woman’s ‘learned
helplessness’, her dependence, her victimization, and her low self-esteem, in
order to establish that she suffers from ‘battered woman syndrome’, the legal
debate shifts from the objective rationality of her actions to preserve her own
life to those personal inadequacies which apparently explain her failure to
flee from her abuser. Such an emphasis comports too well with society’s
stereotypes about women.” [17]
Regrettably, this mirrors our
country’s approach to domestic violence, wherein it adopts a clinical stance by
punishing the female perpetrator instead of recognizing and addressing the
broader issue of domestic violence. This is evident in another case of R v.
Thornton. Sara Thornton confronted an abusive and violent situation wherein her
partner threatened to murder her while she slept. Faced with psychological
paralysis and fearing imminent harm, she stabbed him in a state of utter
despair. Despite her plea that this act was a psychological defence, she was
convicted of murder. The Court refused to perceive the defendant as a victim of
her circumstances. Instead, it deemed her actions to be more aligned with
aggression and vengeance rather than victimization. [18]
Thus, the endeavour to introduce the
concept of diminished responsibility in societies like India reveals not just a
legal obstacle but a deeply rooted cultural and societal reluctance to
acknowledge the experiences of individuals, particularly women, in abusive
circumstances. Persistent patriarchal norms contribute to the perpetuation of
stereotypes, impeding the development of legal frameworks. There is a clear
need for a transformative shift, advocating for a more empathetic and inclusive
approach to comprehend the dynamics of such violence.
CHALLENGING PERSPECTIVES AND
EVALUATING CRITIQUES
Some feminist scholars strongly
critique the utilization of Battered Woman Syndrome and diminished
responsibility as defences in murder cases involving women who have experienced
domestic violence. The serious implications of employing this defence are
evident, as women who successfully use it may be categorized as 'mentally ill'
and subjected to institutional confinement or placed on probation. [19]
However, it must be countered that
these legal approaches offer a nuanced comprehension of the intricate dynamics
in domestic violence. They maintain that these defences aim to recognize the
impact of abuse on mental well-being, striving for a fair legal assessment
without stigmatizing women. Supporters stress the significance of acknowledging
the distinctive challenges individuals face in abusive relationships,
contending that these defences can enhance a more compassionate and equitable
legal system.
Another frequently asked questions is
why these women endure the violence and don't simply end their relationships
with their partners. Derived from American psychologist Martin Seligman's
studies, Dr. Walker adapted the concept of 'learned helplessness' to elucidate
the behaviour of battered women. Persistent battering and abuse create a sense
of entrapment, and the lack of proper physical and mental support, especially
in India's socio-cultural environment, makes it extremely difficult for women
to break free from their abusive partners. This leads us to the next critique,
in which women may misuse this standard or exception to avoid punishment. This
argument emerges on two fronts: first, it is argued that it might give women
the freedom to revenge and kill their husbands with little provocation, thus
allowing for an easier escape from legal penalties. Second, it is suggested
that this method may jeopardise the right to a fair trial for male homicide
suspects and victims.
As we counter this criticism, it is
pertinent to note that Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) as a legal defence is not
merely about establishing a new exception; rather, it provides a framework
within statutory defences for judges to comprehend the circumstances of a
battered woman, taking into account their experiences and trauma. BWS does not
guarantee complete exoneration; it functions as a partial defence. This implies
that utilizing BWS in cases involving provocation or diminished responsibility
merely shifts the liability from a more serious offense, like murder, to
culpable homicide not amounting to murder. While there is disagreement among
psychologists regarding the severity of this condition, its assessment should
be done on a case-by-case basis rather than establishing it as a blanket
exception for all women.[20]
Despite the criticism, there is a
necessity for the law and courts in India to be open to Battered Woman Syndrome
(BWS) and diminished responsibility. Domestic violence is deeply ingrained in
society, and women enduring abuse find themselves ensnared in violent
relationships, often due to inadequate institutional responses.
REFORMING INDIAN LAW
This paper advocates for certain
reforms that can be undertaken to ensure the inclusion of diminished
responsibility within the framework of the Indian legal system. The most
essential recommendation is to include a section in the IPC or any upcoming
criminal legislation that clearly addresses the concept of diminished
responsibility. This definition should be exact and unambiguous to assist
individuals who may not be in the right frame of mind while committing a
criminal offence. It is critical to revise sentencing guidelines to reflect a
more nuanced understanding of reduced responsibility, as well as to encourage
customized and adaptable sentencing that is appropriate for individuals with
mental disorders.
To provide legitimate opinions on the
accused's mental state, it is critical to urge the participation of mental
health specialists as expert witnesses in situations of diminished
responsibility. Education programs for juries, judges, and legal professionals
could help eliminate bias and stigma associated with mental health concerns
while also improving consciousness of these topics in court. To assist in the
development of evidence-based policy and legal reforms, research initiatives
and data gathering efforts should be conducted to get a better knowledge of the
prevalence and patterns of circumstances involving decreased liability.
CONCLUSION
To summarise, India's legal system
for diminished responsibility demonstrates a significant gap in addressing
mental health complications in criminal culpability. The lack of express
provisions highlights the limitations of present regulations in recognising
nuanced features of diminished responsibility. Comparative investigations with
the UK's Homicide Act and the Nallathangal syndrome in Madras reveal more
precise legal frameworks that recognise the complex relationship between mental
health and criminal behaviour. However, cultural and social norms in India
present challenges, particularly for women enduring domestic violence, since
strongly ingrained patriarchal traditions oppose accepting their experiences.
Despite criticism, reform ideas
emphasise the importance of clear legal definitions, procedures, and expert
advice from mental health professionals. The reform aspires to create an
empathetic and inclusive judicial system that takes into account changing
attitudes towards mental health issues. Creating awareness and legislative
changes are required for an appropriate response to cases involving diminished
responsibility. Addressing India's legal
framework weaknesses necessitates a comprehensive approach that includes legal
reforms, societal adjustments, and an awareness of the complex relationships
between mental health and criminal conduct.
Only via these comprehensive measures will India be able to advance
towards a legal system that is both just and compassionate in recognising
challenges of diminished responsibility.
[1] Stephen J. Morse , “Diminished
Capacity: A Moral and Legal Conundrum,” International Journal of Law and
Psychiatry, June 4, 2002,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0160252779900098.
[2] The Indian Penal Code, 1860, §300.
[3] The Indian Penal Code, 1860, §84.
[4] Legal Paradigm - International
Journal of Law and legal jurisprudence ..., accessed January 18, 2024,
http://www.ijlljs.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/10.pdf.
[5] The Indian Penal Code, 1860, §85.
[6] Arlie Loughnan, “‘Manifest
Madness’: The Intersection of ‘Madness’ and Crime,” Manifest Madness Mental
Incapacity in the Criminal Law, 2012, 39–64,
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698592.003.0003.
[7] Homicide Act, 1957, §2.
[8] Arlie Loughnan, “‘Manifest
Madness’: The Intersection of ‘Madness’ and Crime,” Manifest Madness Mental
Incapacity in the Criminal Law, 2012, 39–64,
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698592.003.0003.
[9] Coroners and Justice Act, 2009,
§52 (Amending Homicide Act , 1957, §2).
[10] Keerthana Medarametla, Battered
women: The gendered notion of defences available, accessed January 18, 2024,
https://repository.nls.ac.in/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=slr.
[11] Devm, Devm / About AuthorMore
posts by Devm, and More posts by Devm, “Battered Women Syndrome,” Jus Corpus,
September 4, 2021, https://www.juscorpus.com/battered-women-syndrome/.
[12] Suyambukkani v. State of T.N.,
1989 SCC OnLine Mad 481.
[13] Manju Lakra v. State of Assam,
2013 SCC OnLine Gau 207.
[14] The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
[15] “?? ????? ????????,” ????????????,
accessed January 18, 2024,
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/battered-woman-syndrome-prospect-of-situating-it-within-criminal-law-in-india.
[16] Adv Dr Shalu Nigam et al.,
“Battered Women Syndrome: Applying This Legal Doctrine in the Indian Context,”
Countercurrents, August 6, 2016,
https://countercurrents.org/2016/08/battered-women-syndrome-applying-this-legal-doctrine-in-the-indian-context/#_ftn17.
[17] Regina A. Schuller et al., “Rethinking
Battered Woman Syndrome Evidence: The Impact of Alternative Forms of Expert
Testimony on Mock Jurors’ Decisions.,” Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science
/ Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement 36, no. 2 (2004): 127–36,
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087223.
[18] R. v. Thornton (No. 2), (1996) 1
WLR 1174.
[19] R. v Byrne, (1960) 2 QB 396, 403:
(1960) 3 WLR 440.
[20] Analysis Criminal Law Feminism
Opinion Women’s rights et al., “The Conflicting Intersection of the ‘Reasonable
Man’ Standard and the Battered Woman Syndrome – the Leaflet,” The Leaflet – An
independent platform for cutting-edge, progressive, legal, and political
opinion., December 19, 2021,
https://theleaflet.in/the-conflicting-intersection-of-the-reasonable-man-standard-and-the-battered-woman-syndrome/#:~:text=2.
Article Information
DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY IN INDIA: BEYOND THE WHITE AND BLACK OF GUILT AND INNOCENCE
Authors: SUHANI RASTOGI, LAREINA LEO
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/01/25
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.