Trial Can't Proceed Without Deciding Plea Of Unsoundness Of Mind Under BNSS: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside a trial court order directing continuation of trial merely based on medical report concluding the petitioner to be of sound mind, without any reasoned adjudication on the application filed under Section 368 BNSS.

Section 368 BNSS lays down the procedure for trial of a person of unsound mind.

The bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman observed that before proceedings with the trial, the trial court is mandated to decide the application under Section 368, BNSS. Hence, while setting aside the challenged order, the trial court was directed to pass a reasoned/speaking order on the application.

It was the case of the petitioner, who was charged for murder, that he was suffering from Bipolar Affective Disorder (BPAD) and was of unsound mind since 2019. Hence, an application under Section 368 BNSS, was moved before the trial court.

Pursuant to this application, the trial court had directed medical examination of the petitioner, however, as alleged by the petitioner, the trial was not postponed as required under Section 368, neither any specific order was passed towards the application.

The first medical report, submitted by the Senior Medical Officer, Jail Dispensary concluded that the petitioner's mental health was stable. Being dissatisfied, the trial court asked for a further medical report. Another report was submitted by the Department of Psychiatry, Medical College, which also concluded that the petitioner was suffering from some mental disorder.

The trial court again observed that the report was unsatisfactory, without assigning any reasons, and directed the Jailor, to obtain fresh medical report. The petitioner was examined by a Medical Board, and its report concluded that the petitioner was not of unsound mind, and was capable of being tried.

Based on this report, without adjudicating upon the application under Section 368, the Court proceeded with the trial.

The counsel argued that under Section 368, the Court was duty bound to conduct a proper inquiry regarding petitioner's mental soundness, before proceeding. It was submitted that the order merely reproduced the medical opinion without any independent assessment or reasoning to the effect whether the petitioner possessed requisite cognitive ability to face the trial.

It was further submitted that no finding was recorded regarding petitioner's capacity to comprehend the proceedings which was a sine qua non for continuing trial under Section 368, BNSS. Relying solely on the report by the Medical Board, without assigning any reasons and passing order on the application, was argued to be arbitrary and contrary to law.

After hearing the contentions, the Court perused the material, and stated that before proceedings, the Court ought to have decided the application under Section 368.

Accordingly, the challenged order was set aside, and the trial court was directed to pass a speaking or reasoned order on the application under Section 368, and then proceed with the trial.

Title: Amit Rathor v State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 37

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Sahajveer Baweja

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Amit Punia

Click Here To Read/Download Order