Drummond,
who
actually
was
using
the
theses
question
were
named
as
M'Naghten
the
act,
the
party
accused
was
whether
the
defendant
is
able
to
fully
CONSTITUTE
ELEMENT
OF
INSANITY DEFENSE
There are three conditions to be satisfied in any case
where a defence of insanity is raised:
[1.] The accused was suffering from the disease of
the mind Disease of the mind is a legal term and not
a medical term.The law is concerned with the question
whether the accused is to hold legally responsible for
his acts. Lord Denning defined it as any mental
disorder which has manifested itself in violence and is
prone to recur is a disease of the mind.At any rate it is
5
following
complete
destruction
of
voluntary control;
Connoting the state of a person who, though
capable of action, is not conscious of what he is
8
10
11
sent
for
hospitalization
rather
than
complete
12
revised
provision
incorporates
this
judicial
lay
with
the
meaning
of
mental
13
responsibility
with
the
clearly
comprehensible
However
it
has
been
recognized
as
an
14
Insane
Delusion
test
was
the
second
test
15
prongs,
substituting
the
more
lenient
by
inserting
either
"criminality"
or
IPC,
section
84
contained
also
the
general
16
statment
of
law
as
to
criminal
SECTION
84
OF
IPC
AND
MNAUGHTEN
PRINCIPLE
IPC section 84 deals with the law of insanity on the
subject. This provision is made from the MNaghten
rules of England. In the draft penal code, Lord
Macaulay suggested two section (66 and 67), one
stating that nothing is an offence which is done by a
person in a state of idiocy and the other stating that
.nothing
is
an
offence
which
person
does
in
comprehensible
term
unsoundness
of
mind
17
conditions
and
affliction
of
mind
which
Ingredients
[B.] UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND
The Code does not define unsoundness of mind. But to
exempt a man from criminal liability unsoundness of
mind must reach that degree such that it materially
impairs the cognitive faculties of the mind that can form
a ground of exemption from criminal responsibility. A
distinction must be drawn between insanity affecting
the cognitive faculties of a man and that affecting the
will or emotions. It is only the first that is within the
purview of the section.
In Bikari v. State of U.P., it was held that where evidence
of
deliberate
or
premeditated
actions
are
found,
18
of
delusion
is
unable
to
appreciate
the
19
20
21
22
it
was
held
that
even
though
judicial
23
24
24
25
PART
OTHER
V.
LAW
OF
CRIMINAL
INSANITY
CODES:
IN
AN
OVERVIEW
The Criminal Codes of many countries provide for a
broader scope for the defence of insanity.
[A.] INSANITY LAW IN USA
The
United
States'
courts
expanded
upon
the
would
not
excuse
crimes
committed
after
prolonged contemplation.
Another development with limited application in the law
of the insanity plea in the United States was the so
called "product" test. According to this test, the
defendant would not be criminally responsible if his
unlawful act was the product or result of a mental
disease or defect.
The American Legal Institute's (ALI) Model Penal Code
(MPC) test, found in MPC section 4.01, has also been
followed in USA. The ALI test contains a cognitive
25
26
27
27
28
THE
DEFENCE
OF
INSANITY
IN
THE
28
29
30
the
absence
of
defence
of
diminished
31
31
32
CONCLUSION
The Indian Law on insanity is based on the rules laid
down in the MNaghten case. However, the MNaghten
rules have become obsolete and are not proper and
suitable in the modern era. The MNaghten rule is
based
on
the
entirely
obsolete
and
misleading
33
three
compartments
of
the
mind
controlling
34
34