Chandigarh, September 5
A local court has denied a request by defendant Sanjeev Mahajan and others for the appointment of a medical board to check the mental health of prosecution witness Rahul Mehta ahead of his examination at trial in the alleged seizure case. property of Sector 37, Chandigarh.
What the lawyer said
Rajesh Sharma, lawyer for Sanjeev Mahajan, said that given Mehta’s mental health, it was obvious that he would not be able to testify true and correct facts, and could testify according to his fantasies.
The court issued the order while allowing a request by the prosecution to question Mehta in the vulnerable witness room. The prosecution had filed a request to this effect on August 1.
The prosecution, while citing the medical history of Mehta’s treatment at the PGI, stressed the need to examine him in the vulnerable witness room to avoid any eye contact of the victim with the accused.
Manu Kakar, Special Prosecutor, said that Mehta’s parents and other family members had died at the time of the offense and that he was living alone in his house, No. 340, Sector 37-C, Chandigarh. He was not in good mental health and, taking advantage of his condition, transfer documents relating to the house were executed by the accused.
Mehta had been missing for three and a half years and it was discovered that the defendant had detained him in various locations in Gujarat, Rajasthan and other remote locations during that time.
He alleged that the victim was mistreated, harassed and abused by the defendant for more than three and a half years away from his place of residence in Chandigarh. This put a load of bad memories on his psyche and for this reason the request was moved to examine him in the vulnerable witness room.
Rajesh Sharma, lawyer for Sanjeev Mahajan, said that given Mehta’s mental health, it was obvious that he would not be able to testify true and correct facts, and could testify according to his fantasies. He could testify falsely after being instructed by the prosecution to the detriment of the accused, he added.
After hearing arguments, the court said a reading of the victim’s treatment summary revealed that Mehta’s recent follow-up with PGI was on April 4, 2013, and thereafter he had not maintained any contact. with the Department of Psychiatry. , PGI. This meant that since 2013, Mehta had not received any treatment from the PGI. Thus, said summary could not be taken into consideration to determine whether he was competent to file in 2022 or not.
The court said during the inquest that Mehta was questioned by police and his statement was recorded by a magistrate, and none of them found him incompetent to testify.
The special prosecutor rightly said that Mehta appeared in court and that his appearance and conduct in court were not deemed abnormal by any of the defense counsel or anyone else in the court. Thus, the request filed by the accused was inadmissible and was dismissed.