Abstract

Overseeing the largest democracy in the world, India's legal system has the difficult challenge of merging many racial groups, socioeconomic levels, and castes. The defence of insanity, as stated in the Indian Penal Code, exempts mentally sick persons from prosecution; nevertheless, this clause has been exploited, allowing some people to escape punishment for crimes they have committed without really being mentally ill. This research investigates the current effectiveness of the insanity defense and explores more precise methods or evaluations. Examining perspectives on the insanity defense from other countries can offer valuable insights. Although individuals acquitted due to insanity are often directed to the mental health system, treatment for their condition rarely prevents future criminal behavior. In contrast, mentally sound offenders face punishment, deterrents, societal protection, and rehabilitation. Supporting the "Relevance ratio" for evidential relevance and quality control in expert testimony, this study sheds light on the historical evolution of the insanity defense within the Indian legal system. It suggests that legal assumptions about voluntary conduct may need to be reassessed in line with advancements in neuroscience to align better with current scientific understanding. Essentially, this study aims to propose modifications and alternative approaches by scrutinizing the subtleties of India's insanity defense system and integrating perspectives from other international perspectives and neuroscience research. Even though the mental health system is usually consulted for criminals found not guilty by reason of insanity, therapy for their illness rarely discourages them from committing crimes again. Conversely, sane criminals deal with punishment, deterrents, protection from society, and rehabilitation. This paper emphasizes the historical evolution of the insanity defense within the Indian judicial system, supporting the "Relevance ratio" for evidential relevance and quality control on expert testimony. It suggests that in light of recent advancements in neuroscience, legal presumptions regarding voluntary conduct may need to be reexamined in order to better align with current scientific understanding. Essentially, this study aims to propose modifications and alternative approaches by scrutinizing the subtleties of India's insanity defense system and integrating perspectives from other international perspectives and neuroscience research.

Keywords