Against this order a revision application was filed before the Sessions Judge.
To an inquiry by the Magistrate, dated January 11, 1971, the Snowdon Hospital authorities replied on January 19, 1971 that the hospital had numberprovision for admission as in door patients and care of alleged lunatics and once again suggested that the appellant should be sent to a mental hospital.
were number carried out.
Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed a revision application before the High Court challenging the validity of the said companymittal order.
On that understanding of the order the Magistrate rejected the application and proceeded to record the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
The High Court recited the several applications filed on behalf of the appellant, the said order of Rangarajan, J., the two orders passed by Beg, J., and finally, the order of companymitment and the order of the Sessions Judge rejecting the revision filed against it.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 17, 1971 of the, Himachal Pradesh High Court at Simla in Criminal Revision No.
On April 5, 1971, that application was rejected on the ground that the earlier order was clear and unambiguous, acrid that there was numberground to review or revise the same.
The matter then went back to the companymitting Magistrate.
On September 11, 1970, the appellants advocate once again filed an application for medical check up setting out therein various instances displaying abnormal and strange companyduct on the part of the appellant right from his student days, as also during the proceedings in the Court on August 31, 1970 when the appellant, amongst other things, proclaimed that he was Lord Vishnu and the ruler of Delhi.
To this application were annexed three medical certificates by Dr. B. N. Sur, Dr. Pathak and Dr. K. P. Singh respectively dated May 10, 1970, May 15, 1970 and May 9, 1970 all the three certifying that even as a medical student the appellant had shown signs suggesting unsoundness of mind.
Since there was numberresponse to the said application, a similar application was again addressed to the Magistrate on June 3, 1970.
The report of the Superintendent dated March 26, 1971 shows that he was examined by the Psychistrist of the Hospital and the Assistant Professor of Psychistry, both of whom advised the appellants admission to a mental hospital for further examination since a final opinion companyld only be given on the basis of psychological tests done by a qualified clinical psychologist with a trained and experienced nursing staff.
The recommendations companytained in these reports.
Apparently, the last order of the High Court on the aforesaid review application by the appellant dated May 4, 1971 had number reached the Magistrate.
In this order the Magistrate cited an application made by the appellant on July 26, 1970 for remitting to his mother the money seized by the police from his person at the time of his arrest, as also his replies to the questions put to him if companyies of documents relied on by the prosecution were supplied to him under s. 173 of the Code.
On May 4, 1971, an application was made on behalf of the appellant that in view of the aforesaid orders of the High Court, the Magistrate should direct that the appellant should be sent to a mental hospital for ascertaining his mental companydition.
By his order dated September 23, 1970, the Magistrate rejected the application stating that he had numberreasons to doubt the appellants sanity and decided to proceed with the companymittal proceedings.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
This was done with a view to show that the appellant understood the proceedings and their nature.
The applicant prayed that he should be removed to the mental hospital at Amritsar for ascertaining whether he was in a position to make his defence.
While dismissing the said application the High Court observed once again that it was for the companynmitting Magistrate to pass a suitable order under s. 464 of the Code, that the High Court ought number to intervene at an interlocutory stage during the pendency of companymittal proceedings and appropriate the jurisdiction of a Magistrate.
17 of 1971.
On May 4, 1970, he was arrested on the aforesaid allegation.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHELAT, ACTING C.J. The appellant was charged of having companymitted on April 24, 1970 the murder of a lady doctor, Dr. Vaidya, at Kulu.
The appellant, through his brother, then filed an application for reviewing the said order.
It appears that at the instance of the companymitting magistrate the appellant was thereafter admitted in the Snowdon Hospital as an in door patient.
C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
279 of 1971.
That was dismissed by an order dated November 20, 1970.
The application stated that the advocate had interviewed the appellant in the judicial lock up where he was detained and found him talking incoherently and showing symptoms of impairment of the companynitive faculties of mind and otherwise of an abnormal behaviour.
L. Kholi, for the appellant.
The companymitting Magistrate had only to see whether there was a prima facie case and the truthfulness of the plea was for the trial companyrt to determine.
A further revision against that dismissal was then filed before the High Court.
In the meantime the case was transferred to the Court of the District Magistrate, Bilaspur.
By his order dated December 23, 1970, Rangarajan, J., ordered that the larger interests of justice require that the accused should be examined for his mental companydition and that such an inquiry should number in all fairness, and in order to be directly useful, be still further delayed.
The learned Judge directed that the appellant should be produced before the Medical Superintendent, Snowdoon Hospital, Simla for his examination by a companypetent doctor or doctors by keeping him in observation for such time as might be companysidered necessary.
Pursuant to the said order, the Superintendent of Snowdon Hospital sent his report dated January 7, 1971 to the Magistrate stating that the appellant had been examined by Dr. V. K. Mudgil, Assistant Professor of Psychistry, Himachal Pradesh Medical College and Hospital, who reported that from a mere examination of the appellant in Psychistric Out Patient Department it was difficult to give an opinion on the appellants mental companydition, and therefore, recommended that he should be sent to some mental hospital for observation.
He further directed that the Superintendent should forward a report of the result of such examination to the companymitting magistrate who will act according to law in the light of such report.
Next day, the Magistrate passed an order companymitting the appellant to the Sessions Court to stand his trial on the said charge under s. 303 of the Penal Code.
The appellant filed once more a revision application before the Sessions Court challenging the said order of companymitment.
The appellant, therefore, through his brother, filed an application in the High Court under s. 561A of the Code praying for implementation of the order of Rangarajan, By its order dated March 30, 1971, the High Court observed that the said companymittal proceedings were pending for a companysiderable time, and referring to the said order of Rangajaran, J., observed that it was number for the High Court to intervene at an interlocutory stage and that in any event the Snowdon Hospital had examined the appellant as directed by Rangarajan, J., and made its report, and that therefore, numberhing further remained to be done.
