Tuesday, May 28, 2024

๐—๐˜‚๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐—ฎ๐—น๐——๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—บโ„ข

๐™ฐ๐™ต๐™ต๐™พ๐š๐™ณ๐™ฐ๐™ฑ๐™ป๐™ด & ๐™ฐ๐™ฒ๐™ฒ๐™ด๐š‚๐š‚๐™ธ๐™ฑ๐™ป๐™ด

IPCMODEL ANSWER

NON- COMPOS MENTIS

Write a short note on Non- Compos mentis.

The literal meaning of term โ€œnon-compos mentisโ€ is โ€œnot of sound mindโ€. This term is used to refer a person who could not be criminally held liable for committing any act only because of his mental condition.
This term deals with the general exception which has been mentioned under section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. According to section 84 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, a person cannot be held liable for committing any act if because of his unsound mind he does not know the nature of his act or if he does not know that what he is doing is wrong and contrary to law.

In the leading case of R vs. Arnold (1724), the ground of insanity as a defense was raised for the first time and the Honโ€™ble court excused the offender from his liability only on the ground that at the time of commission of an act, the offender was not in a fit mental condition to know the nature of his act.

In the Criminal Justice System, if the offender wants to claim the benefit under section 84 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, then the burden of proof always lies upon the offender to prove that his case falls under this general exception and for this he has to prove his mental disability and then the effect of his mental disability i.e., legal disability and also his mental background. According to this system, it is not enough to prove mental insanity but the offender has to prove the legal insanity i.e., he has to prove that he did not know that the act was contrary to law. If the offender proves the legal disability, then only, he can get the benefit of this section.

Moreover, according to this Criminal Justice System, the accused has to prove that he was legally disable at the time of commission of an act. It is not enough to prove the disability prior to the commission of an offence or after the commission of an offence. He has to prove that he was disable at the time of commission of an act. If he fails to prove legal disability at the time of commission of an act then in such a case, he cannot get the benefit of section 84 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. But if he proves the fact that he was legally disabled at the time of commission of an act then only he will get the benefit of this general exception.

In the leading case of R vs. McNaughten (1843), the Honโ€™ble court held that in order to get the benefit of legal disability, the offender has to prove that he was legally disable at the time of commission of an act and at that time because of his legal disability he did not know the nature of his act or did not know that the act is wrong or contrary to law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!