The plea claimed that neither the woman's husband nor her family was willing to accept her though her condition was stated to be normal in 2014 and she was ready to be discharged. The Bombay High Court Wednesday asked Maharashtra government to respond to a PIL seeking implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, and investigation into mental health care institutions that do not regularly assess the condition of patients to ascertain if they can be allowed to live in the society.
The plea said that the implementation of the Act would protect the rights of persons with mental illness and allow them to move mental health review boards to seek discharge. It also seeks implementation of Supreme Court guidelines with regards to mental health care homes and mentally ill patients.
A division bench of Justice S S Shinde and Justice S V Kotwal was hearing the PIL filed by psychiatrist Dr Harish Shetty, who highlighted the plight of patients admitted in institutions, including a woman, who had languished in Regional Mental Hospital in Thane for 12 years. The plea claimed that neither the woman’s husband nor her family was willing to accept her though her condition was stated to be normal in 2014 and she was ready to be discharged. She was admitted to the institution in 2009.
The HC was informed that despite the hospital followed the Mental Health Act, 1987, which stipulated periodic checkups and reports, the woman ended up spending “12 precious years of her life” in the Thane institution and was discharged IN 2021 only after the recommendation of a court-appointed expert panel.
As per the PIL, a family court judge recorded that the woman’s search for Mental Health Review Board was “arduous” and she could not avail the benefit of the 2017 law. The judge also discussed the possibility of other people similarly languishing in mental health institutions. After the government lawyer sought time to take instructions from officials to respond to the plea, Justice Shinde pulled up the lawyer and questioned how the state can be “casual” in “crucial matters concerning issues about public at large” while maintaining that the same was not adversarial litigation.
Thereafter, Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni appeared before HC and sought time to respond to the plea while saying that it would study the Supreme Court order in a similar issue before making its submissions. The HC accepted this and posted next hearing to April 12.
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
