ABDUL KAREEM Vs. T GOPALAKRISHNAN NAMBISAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Satyanathan is a final year M.B.B.S. student in the Medical College, Calicut. While studying medicine, he took particular interest in religious knowledge and eventually, he accepted faith of Islam. Though the change of faith did not invite much publicity initially by efflux of time, it led to a situation in which the sanity of Satynanthan was brought into doubt. The consequence is that he is now being detained under orders passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kozhikode. The detention is inside a room of the Men's Hostel attached to the Medical College. The detention was first made under an order passed in the purported exercise of S.8 of the Mental Health Act, 1987. On the expiry of the period of the original order, Satyanathan was continued to be kept under detention by extending the period from time to time. Later, learned magistrate realised that Mental Health Act Has never been brought into force in the State of Kerala. Hence, the further detention was ordered in the purported exercise of some of the provisions of the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912 (for short 'the Act'). The purpose sought to be achieved by detaining Satyanathan is to subject him to observation by a team of medical experts attached to the Department of Psychiatry in the Medical College, Calicut. In the meanwhile, one Abdul Kareem, another student of the same Medical College, filed Crl. M.C. No. 909/89 in this court praying for quashing the orders of detention. However, before the arguments could be heard in that case, Crl. M.C. No. 945/89 has been filed by Satyanathan himself for similar reliefs. In view of the petition filed by Satyanathan, it is unnecessary to consider the locus standi of Abdul Kareem to challenge the orders affecting Satyanathan.

(2.) Some more facts, which may be necessary for the disposal of these petitions, are the following: On 20-4-1989, Shri T. Gopalakrishnan Nambisan, father of Satyanathan (who is the respondent in both the petitions here) gave First Information Statement to the Assistant Sub Inspector of Medical College Police Station, Calicut alleging that his son Satyanathan was abducted and kept in concealment by four other students (Abdul Rasheed, Jalaludeen, Basheer and Abdul Kareem). The police registered a crime and started investigation. On 26-4-1989 Satyanathan's father filed a petition before the Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Calicut under S.97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') for the issue of a search warrant to trace out his son from the place of concealment. The father had alleged in the said petition that his son has some mental problems and that while he was under treatment, he was abducted by the four students who exerted pressure on him to proselytize him to the faith of Islam. On the same day, Satyanathan himself appeared in person before the learned magistrate and submitted a petition through Advocate Shri. Manjeri Sunder Raj in which he totally disowned any connection with the four students mentioned above. He made it clear that change of faith by conversion to Islam was done on his own accord uninfluenced by any other person. Learned Magistrate observed, after questioning him in detail, that "Satyanathan does not seem to be a mental patient as he was giving sensible answers to all questions put to him". However, since it was Satyanathan's father who attributed insanity to his son, learned Magistrate wanted him to be examined by a team of expert doctors (one is the Director and Professor of Psychiatry and the other is the Tutor in Psychiatry). The doctors sent a report, after examining Satyanathan recommending that a two weeks' stay in hospital is necessary for Satyanathan to have "a thorough psychiatric examination and repeated observation". Accordingly, learned magistrate directed detention of Satyanathan "in a suitable place in the Medical College . Hospital which is not having free access to the general public". The said order was passed on 28-4-1989. Though the learned magistrate did not use the term detention in his first order, he started using that word in subsequent orders by which the period of detention was extended from time to time (vide the order dated 17-5-1989). Learned magistrate has stated that it was passed in exercise of the powers under the proviso to S.30 of the Mental Health Act, 1987.

(3.) On 15-5-1989, the team of doctors submitted a report expressing their "impression" that Satyanathan has 'Paranoid Psychosis'. They said in the said report that his cognitive functions are normal, his psycho motor activity is within normal limb, no formal thought disorders evident, no hallucinations elicited and on surface, he gives the impression of a person with very stable emotional reaction. Learned magistrate seems to have allowed Satyanathan to be examined as a witness in court. He was cross examined at length stretching over days to complete the examination. The impression one gathers from all the answers which Satyanathan gave is that he is a suave whose main interest is pursuit for scriptural treasures. None of the answers could possibly point to any abnormality of his mental or cognitive faculties. Despite all these, learned magistrate kept him under detention from 28-4-1989 onwards under orders of court which are in challenge in these proceedings.