Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

Rajender Garg vs The Inspector Of Police

Madras High Court|17 December, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.) The petitioner himself has brought forth this application, seeking for a writ of habeas corpus, for his production before the Court.
2. Perused the affidavit filed in support of the petition and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. As could be seen from the averments made in the affidavit and also the submissions made, the petitioner was taken to the 2nd respondent Mental Health Institute as he was mentally ill, but he was not so; that on 15th August 2009, a meeting was conducted in the 2nd respondent institute, which he also attended and he was asked to inform about the situation; that under such circumstances, this application is brought forth stating that he is a normal person and his mental capacity is alright, but for the reasons known to them, he has been kept under the custody of the 2nd respondent as if he is a mentally ill patient, which is actually against the true state of affairs.
3. On notice, the respondents are present before the Court. The 2nd respondent, who has filed a report in respect of the mental condition of the petitioner, would inform the Court that the petitioner has been in the 2nd respondent institute for the past 23 years from 1980 onwards, and has been given treatment; that now he is admitted for the sixth time and he is getting treatment for major mental illness and that even today, he is not fit enough to be sent outside or to be given treatment to get out of mental illness.
4. After hearing the 2nd respondent and also upon perusing the report produced by him, it is clear that he has been actually getting treatment for major mental illness and apart from that, he is showing improvement in his mental state. Under such circumstances, so long as he has not been given a certificate that he is fit enough to be sent outside, the Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case where the request of the petitioner could be acceded to and hence, the same cannot be considered.
Accordingly, the habeas corpus petition is disposed of.
gl To
1. The Inspector of Police, Kilpauk Police Station, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.
2. Director, Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rajender Garg vs The Inspector Of Police

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
17 December, 2009