BEFORE THE HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

State of Gujarat

(APPELLANT)
V.
Michael

(RESPONDENT)

MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES. ..................................................................................................... 3

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.......................................................................................... 4

STATEMENT OF FACTS . ....................................................................................................... 5

ISSUES RAISED . ...................................................................................................................... 7

ARGUMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 8

PRAYERS.................................................................................................................................11

Page 2
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

WEBSITES REFERRED:

https://advocatetanmoy.com/2018/03/02/distinction-between-legal-insanity-and-
medical-insanity/
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insanity
https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/What-is-the-difference-between-
medical-insanity-and-legal-insanity--227176.asp
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676201/
https://www.topsecretwriters.com/2013/05/the-legal-system-insanity-vs-mental-
illness/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-therapy/200907/the-definition-
insanity

RELEVANT CASES :

1. Ratanlal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 December, 1970

2. Ashok Dattatraya Godase vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 April, 1993

Page 3
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE STATE OF GUJARAT, HEREBY HUMBLY SUBMIT

TO THE DIVISIONAL BENCH OF SUPREME COURT’S
JURISDICTION FOR FINAL HEARING ON 10/1/2017 AGAINST
ORDER OF ACQUITTAL BY HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
ON 17/11/2016.

THE RESPONDENT WOULD LIKE TO HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THIS SPECIAL LEAVE FOR
APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.

Page 4
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

 On 25th February, 2008, Michael, aged 29, S/O- Late John, R/O- 54/3-Shubham
Apartment, Athwalines, Surat, and Jenny, Aged 24 yrs, D/O- Defrado, R/O-Greater
Ango Colony, Adajan, Surat, were married according to their religious rituals.

 Their marital life was going smoothly. On some occasions they used to have few
verbal quarrels with each other but they reconciled soon after the verbal fight. Two
years after the marriage Jenny gave birth to a baby girl (Jennifer)on 4th September
2010.

 After few months of the birth of Jennifer, Jenny observed certain changes in the
behaviour of Michael. Michael started behaving in a rude way and he usually used
to become violent on every petty issue without any reason.
 Initially Jenny did not took the matter in a serious way but when the violent
character of Michael continued Jenny took her husband Michael to the doctor
Alfered (DW1), who was a psychiatrist. The doctor advised Michael to have
control over anger and to take certain medicines. The doctor diagnosed him to be
suffering from first stage of Bipolar Mood Disorder (Bipolar disorder, also known
as manic-depressive illness, is a brain disorder that causes unusual shifts in mood,
energy, activity levels, and the ability to carry outday-to-day tasks. There are four
basic types of bipolar disorder; all of them involve clear changes in mood, energy,
and activity levels)..

 In spite of the medical treatment, the violent behaviour of Michael continued to

exist. On slight issues, Michael used to become violent and fight with Jenny and
beat her without any reason. On 5th December 2010 at 11am, loud noise of fight-
ing, crying and shouting was coming from the house of Michael.
 On hearing the cry, Daniel (PW3) who was neighbour of Michael went in the house
of Michael and found Jenny lying unconscious on the floor pooled in blood with
various injuries on her body.At that time Daniel saw Michael hiding a 7 inch Iron
Axe in the garden.

Thereafter Daniel called the police and Jenny was taken to government hospital
whereby she was treated by Dr. Andrew (PW2).

Page 5
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 Michael was arrested by police on the same day and was kept in police custody. On
6th December, 2010 Jenny regained her consciousness and her statement was recor-
ded by Jaison (PW1) SHO of Athwalines Police Station.
 In her statement she told to the police that on 5th December at 10 am Michael came
home and started fighting with her in a violent way and when she resisted Michael
attacked him with axe kept in the garden.
On 8th December, Jenny died because of the injury in her lower abdomen which
proved fatal. Jennifer the daughter of Michael was sent to Government Child Care
Centre.

 On the basis of the statement of Daniel and the dying declaration of Jenny FIR
was lodged against Michael vide. 733/2010 in Athwalines police station. Michael was
prosecuted under Section 302 of IPC for the murder of Jenny.

 During interrogation Michael stated that he was unconscious at the time when Jenny
was attacked. He told to police that when he regained his consciousness he found
Jenny lying on the floor and axe in his hand. He told to the police that he did not
know from where the axe came and he also stated that he did not know how Jenny
died.

 Final Report was submitted on 3rd Feb.2011 in which Michael was charged for
murder of Jenny under Section 302 of IPC.

Page 6
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 ISSUES RAISED

1. WHETHER SUFFICIENT GROUND OF LEGAL INSANITY EXISTS SO AS

TO EXONERATE THE ACCUSED FROM LIABILITY OF MURDER.

2. WHETHER THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF LEGAL INSANITY ON THE

PART OF DEFENCE IS AT PAR WITH BURDEN OF PROOF ON PART OF
PROSECUTION

Page 7
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 ARGUMENTS

ESSENTIALS OF LEGAL INSANITY

Extend of unsoundness where the person in incapable of knowing :

1) The nature of the act

2) It is contrary to the law

SEC 84 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE (UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND)

Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who , at the time of

doing it , by reason of unsoundness of mind , is incapable of knowing
the nature of the act , or that he is doing what is either wrong or con-
trary to law

PROOF OF LEGAL INSANITY

Legal insanity can be proved in 2ways :

1. Medical evidence
2. Circumstantial evidence

Page 8
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 ARGUMENTS

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Circumstantial evidence is of two parts :

1. Prior conduct to the offence

2. Conduct subsequent to the offence

Conduct prior to the offence

1. Michael had a medical history of Bipolar disorder , which when triggered would lead to
vast shifts in mood ,behavior and conduct.

2. Michael had no prior plans or motive to hurt his wife Jenny who he has a daughter with

3. Micahel had no accomplices to commit the crime or to hurt Jenny.

4. The crime was not committed in some remote or secret place but in their own house.

Conduct subsequent to the offence

1. Michael did not abscond after committing the crime , indicating that he is unaware of the
actions he has committed and that it is contrary to the law.

2. Michael’s conduct after crime had been comitted , he was confused and had no idea how
the axe came in his hand , and how Jenny wass lying the floor.

3. Michael accused of hiding the axe in the garden probably went to keep the axe in its place
where it belonged after he came to his senses. .

Page 9
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
CASE LAW

1. Ashok Dattatraya Godase vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 April, 1993

# Ashok kills his sister in law over some money quarrel and he absconded from the crime
scene for three months and was later arrested.

# In court Ashok took insanity plea and court dismissed it citing that he absconded from the
crime scene and was aware of the nature of the crime committed and knowing it was contrary
to the law .

# Here since Ashok’s legal insanity was not proven , therefore court dismissed the insanity
plea.

2. Ratanlal vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 December, 1970

# Ratanlal set fire near a Khalyan . He was arrested the next day and sent for medical testing.

# Psychiatrist’s report statedd he was depressed.

# Ratanlal pleaded insanity and his plea was accepted by court as per the medical evaluation
and he not absconding from the crime scene .

Page 10
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT
 PRAYER

Wherefore, in light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities
cited, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

Find that:

1. Michael has a history of bipolar disorder with anger issues.

2. Michael was not in his senses when the crime was committed.

3. Michael did not abscond from the crime scene .

And accept Michael’s insanity plea.

Page 11
-MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT