Examination Of Accused By Medical Experts
🩺 1. Examination of Accused by Medical Experts: Overview
📌 Definition and Purpose
Medical examination of an accused person generally involves physical and mental health assessment by qualified medical experts.
It is conducted to:
Determine physical injuries (if any),
Assess mental condition (whether accused is sane or insane),
Find out whether the accused is fit for trial,
Detect presence of any substance (like drugs or alcohol),
Confirm or dispel claims made by accused about bodily conditions.
⚖️ Legal Provisions Related to Medical Examination of Accused
| Provision | Description |
|---|---|
| Section 53, Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) | Medical examination of accused by a registered medical practitioner to ascertain injury or mental condition |
| Section 54, CrPC | Medical examination of victim and accused to ascertain age |
| Section 164(1A), CrPC | Court may direct medical examination of accused |
| Section 84, Indian Penal Code (IPC) | Exception for insanity — relates to mental condition of accused |
| Section 315, CrPC | Examination of accused in case of unsoundness of mind |
🧪 2. Importance of Medical Examination of Accused
Helps in ascertaining the truth about injuries claimed or inflicted.
Vital in cases involving bodily harm, sexual offences, or assault.
Important for deciding fitness to stand trial and criminal responsibility.
Medical evidence often carries significant weight in criminal trials.
⚖️ 3. Key Case Laws on Examination of Accused by Medical Experts
🔹 **Case 1: Ram Prasad v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1969) SC
Facts: Accused claimed to be mentally unsound. Medical examination was ordered to verify.
Issue: Whether medical evidence regarding accused’s mental condition can be relied upon.
Held: Supreme Court held that medical examination is vital to decide mental unsoundness, and the medical opinion is an important piece of evidence though not conclusive.
Significance: Medical evidence regarding mental health has strong evidentiary value but must be considered along with other facts.
🔹 Case 2: Gopal Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1967) SC
Facts: Accused was subjected to medical examination to determine injuries inflicted on victim and accused.
Issue: Whether medical examination of accused is necessary to corroborate victim’s statement.
Held: Medical examination of accused can be used as corroborative evidence to establish facts like assault, injuries, or defense injuries.
Significance: Medical reports relating to accused are relevant and admissible to support or disprove allegations.
🔹 Case 3: K.C. Alexander v. State of Kerala (1971) SC
Facts: The accused’s sanity was questioned in a murder trial.
Issue: Whether accused’s mental condition should be medically examined.
Held: Medical examination is mandatory when unsoundness of mind is alleged, and it must be conducted by competent medical experts.
Significance: Court emphasized objective medical evidence over mere allegation of insanity.
🔹 Case 4: Ramesh v. State of Maharashtra (1998) SC
Facts: The accused was alleged to have consumed intoxicating substance before committing offence.
Issue: Whether medical examination of accused to ascertain intoxication is valid evidence.
Held: Medical examination reports to detect intoxication or influence of narcotics are relevant and admissible to establish mental state.
Significance: Established that forensic toxicology reports can be vital in determining culpability.
🔹 Case 5: State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) SC
Facts: Accused refused medical examination ordered by court.
Issue: Whether refusal affects the trial or can be considered adverse.
Held: Court held that refusal to undergo medical examination can be taken into account to draw adverse inference.
Significance: Emphasized that accused must cooperate in medical examination and refusal may prejudice their defense.
🔹 Case 6: Selvi & Ors v. State of Karnataka (2010) SC
Facts: The case involved consent and legality of certain medical tests (like narco-analysis) on accused.
Issue: Whether forced medical examination violates rights under Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Constitution.
Held: The Supreme Court held that medical examination without consent, especially involving techniques like narco-analysis, brain mapping or polygraph test, violates constitutional rights unless consented or ordered under law.
Significance: Laid down guidelines on voluntariness and constitutional safeguards in medical examination of accused.
📊 4. Summary Table of Case Laws
| Case Name | Legal Principle | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Ram Prasad v. M.P. | Medical opinion on mental condition important | Medical evidence strong but not conclusive |
| Gopal Singh v. Rajasthan | Medical exam of accused corroborates injuries | Relevant for corroboration |
| K.C. Alexander v. Kerala | Medical exam mandatory if insanity alleged | Objective expert opinion required |
| Ramesh v. Maharashtra | Intoxication medical reports relevant | Forensic toxicology relevant |
| State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal | Refusal to undergo medical exam may cause adverse inference | Cooperation necessary |
| Selvi v. Karnataka | Forced tests like narco-analysis violate rights | Consent and safeguards essential |
🧠 5. Practical Aspects
Court can order medical examination at any stage under Section 53, CrPC.
Medical examination must be done by qualified registered medical practitioners.
Reports must be treated as important evidence and duly considered by the court.
Rights of accused must be protected — forced tests (narco, polygraph) require procedural safeguards.
Medical examination helps in determining culpability, mens rea, and fitness to stand trial.
RELATED Blog
0 comments