Judgments on mental disorder by Supreme court & High courts : Difference between Mental Illness and Insanity to be Noted

Difference between Mental Illness and Insanity to be Noted

Mohinder Kaur vs. S.S. Sabharwal

Filed under: Section 13 (1) (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Rule 17 of
Code of Civil Procedure
Appellant: Mohinder Kaur
Respondent: S.S. Sabharwal
Citation: F.A.O. No. 71 of 1979 Decided on 12.11.79
Court: In the High Court of Delhi
Judge: Yogeshwar Dayal
Facts
Mohinder Kaur and S.S. Sabharwal were married with two male children. Both the
sons however died. S.S. Sabharwal then filed this petition for divorce on the ground
that his wife was suffering from mental illness, which included schizophrenia, and
also on the ground that she had deserted him.
In order to support his case, S.S. Sabharwal stated that his wife had been suffering
from incurable insanity from the very start of their marriage. According to him, he
had continued to provide her treatment with the hope that she might be cured. He
also submitted the tickets of various hospitals, which they had visited for her
treatment. It was also alleged that Mohinder could not be left alone in the house
because she used to throw away the goods, cash, and jewelry from the house.
He also went on to state that Mohinder’s mental state was so bad that one could
even suspect death at her hands. According to him, she might kill while sleeping or
administer poison without understanding the merits or demerits of her actions. It
was also stated that she was quite capable of leaving the house during a fit of
insanity.
However, Mohinder Kaur in response denied all of the above allegations. She stated
that it was her husband who was guilty of extending extreme physical and mental
cruelty towards her. She further alleged that her husband had started neglecting her
immediately after the first year of marriage and that he constantly placed
burdensome demands on her threatening that if she did not fulfill those demands she
would be forced to leave the house. She also stated that she was kept on insufficient
diet even during her pregnancy.
Furthermore, Mohinder claimed that their first child had died within 24 hours of birth
and her husband or his mother had not even bothered to visit her in the hospital or
enquire about her health. She also contended that when their second son, who was 4
years old, had fallen ill, her husband had refused to pay for his medicines and diet.
The son had then suffered from paralysis and during this time, she had taken care of
him all by herself. He had died at the age of 8. With respect to the fact that she was
of an unsound mind, Mohinder Kaur denied all the allegations and stated that she
was matriculate and had also worked on a part-time basis before her marriage.
At the Trial Court, the husband had presented evidence of psychiatrists who had
treated his wife. One doctor from AIIMS claimed that he had examined Mohinder
Kaur and had diagnosed her as suffering from schizophrenia. In the crossexamination
however, he had stated that he had only seen her twice but had made
the diagnosis of schizophrenia on the basis of the symptoms. He had also brought
the records wherein these symptoms were listed. In order to support the claims
made by him, S.S. Sabharwal had also presented the evidence of neighbors and
other doctors.
On the other hand, Mohinder Kaur’s lawyer examined the evidence given by another
doctor of AIIMS who stated that he had treated her some time back but he did not
clearly remember her condition. He did not have any records with him. The wife’s
brother also stated that his sister was perfectly all right. During cross-examination,
Mohinder admitted that her husband had never given her beatings, but she denied
the fact that she had been treated at the Willington hospital by a private doctor as
claimed by her husband.
At the Trial Court, the Judge considered two main issues; whether Mohinder Kaur
was insane? Whether she had left the house of her husband, and if so, to what
effect? After examining the arguments put forth by both the parties, the Trial Court
rejected the plea of desertion but found that Mohinder Kaur was suffering from a
mental illness, which was of an incurable nature and therefore granted the decree of
divorce to S.S. Sabharwal.
Mohinder Kaur then filed the present appeal against the order of the Trial Court.
Arguments made on behalf of Mohinder Kaur
The lawyer on behalf of Mohinder Kaur contended that in the plea submitted by S.S.
Sabharwal, it had been stated that his wife was suffering from incurable insanity,
whereas the evidence provided by him showed that she was suffering from
schizophrenia. The lawyer also argued that the issue considered by the Trial Court
was that whether Mohinder was insane but the finding had been that she was
suffering from a mental illness. Therefore, the lawyer contended that the finding was
contrary to the plea taken by S.S. Sabharwal.
Observations of the Court
The Court stated that Section 13 (1) (iii) had been amended in the year 1976, but
S.S. Sabharwal had filed the case prior to this amendment. The Court then quoted
Section 13 (1) (iii) of the Act before it had been amended and explained that prior to
its amendment, this section had not made any distinction between the mental illness
and insanity. According to the Court, the Trial Judge had given the judgment
according to the amendment whereas; S.S. Sabharwal had framed the petition
according to the Act prior to its .amendment
In this situation, S.S. Sabharwal filed an appeal seeking permission for amendment
of the petition. The Court allowed the application for amendment and permitted S.S.
Sabharwal to file the amended petition. The appeal was allowed to the extent that
the judgment and decree of the Trial Court was set aside and the case was
remanded to the Trial Court for trial on the basis of the amended petition. The case
was accordingly remanded.
Sections Referred:
• Section 13 (1) (iii), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955