Mental Health And It's Stance In The Criminal Justice System

Mental health can be defined as our emotional, cognitive and behavioral well being. Mental health governs the way every individual thinks, talks, acts or does anything. Mental health, if deteriorated, can affect our daily life, physical well being and personal relationships. On the plus side, positive mental health leads to a better interpersonal relationships, better outcomes in work and daily life. In saying so, it is needless to say that a better mental health can often, if not always, preserve anyone's ability to live life to their fullest. It can also bring in the much needed balance between daily activities and mental activities in life. All these facts apply to prison inmates as well. What is the position of mental health in the criminal justice system? 

A criminal justice system is the country's legal system, acknowledged as the pillars without which the country might fall into debris. At the current times, when the people are motivated and inspired to fight for human rights, it is only right to make sure the plight of the prisoners are heard as well. For many years, the Apex Court of India has kept an eye on the failing state of prison infrastructure, and the lack of care of prisoners, and inadequacy of prison staff. These issues once caught fire among the young activists who made it their duty to share these concerns to the public, by voicing out their concern as one. Prisoners are a minority, whose mental health issues are often disregarded and neglected. There are considerably high rates of substance abuse, schizophrenia, depression and adjustment issues, most discussed among various other mental health issues, found among the prisoners, who are provided with little to none of effective care and treatment. Howard Zinn, an American historian, philosopher and socialist thinker once said- "I am convinced that imprisonment is a way of pretending to solve the problem of crime. It does nothing for the victims of crime, but perpetuates the idea of retribution, thus maintaining the endless cycle of violence in our culture. It is a cruel and useless substitute for the elimination of those conditions— poverty, unemployment, homelessness, desperation, racism, greed— which are at the root of most punished crime. The crimes of the rich and powerful go mostly unpunished. It must surely be a tribute to the resilience of the human spirit that even a small number of those men and women in the hell of the prison system survive it and hold on to their humanity." True words, unfortunately. The root cause of crime often can also be connected to the root cause of mental health issues. Confining and locking a person away to silence and condemning them to be with their own thoughts, leads the person to darker places, mentally, and without proper treatment and care, it often leads to a person taking their own life.A mentally ill prisoner is defined as anyone who is either detained, or removed from a psychiatric hospital, nursing home or jail, or any other safer custody, under the Mental Health Act, 1978, and does extend to prisoners, as in when a prisoner is mentally ill, they can access quality treatment and care for their betterment. But when a Court sentences a life of prison to mentally ill prisoners, it is basically a tell-tale sign of them being thrown into the abyss, a place where there is no proper maintenance of anything, let alone mental health.

The case of Mrs. Veena Sethi v. State of Bihar & Ors, is regarding a news report published in Indian Express, in the year 1981 December, which observed the state of 16 mentally ill prisoners imprisoned for over twenty five (25) years each. As a result of brimming mental asylums, the court sentenced these sixteen human beings to prison, where the superintendent conveniently was unable to find records regarding the mental state of each of these prisoners. The judgement of this case reprimands the jail administration, and even some magistrates for their inhumane conduct in handling many of these cases, although it did not mention any ways to improve their quality of lives, or their mental health. In the case of Ram Murthy v. State of Karnataka, petitioner wrote a letter, stating the grievances of prisoners, and the Court after noticing and observing it to be true, requested National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences (NIMHANS) to take good care and provide necessary treatment to the mentally ill patients. It was the case of Charanjit Singh v. State & Ors, filed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) that set off the sparks for the issuance of guidelines for the mentally ill people in prisons. NHRC was deeply disturbed by the deplorable and pathetic state of a mentally ill inmate, Mr. Charanjit, and filed a petition on his behalf. When it was discovered that he was of unsound mind, his case was put on hold and he was sent to prison. His situation worsened, and the judgement of this case was held that being aware of his condition, it is not right to leave him to draw his last breath of life within confinement, which if happened- will be a violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court quashed his charge sheet while asking for NHRC's recommendations to help mentally ill prisoners. The recommendations were quite heavy, and if it was implemented, it would have been the most effective system.

The State can always take initiatives to provide care of these prisoners in private hospitals, if the government hospitals or health care centres are full. A report regarding under trial mentally ill prisoners can be sent to the Court or relevant authorities in a timely manner. Installing mental health courts just for the purposes of betterment of mental health of inmates is a viable option, although like various programs, each is bound to have pros and cons. The goal of mental health court is to provide offenders with services and resources, such as housing, employment, financial assistance, social services, and treatment, and therefore, reduce the likelihood of them returning to the criminal justice system. It can be a form of rehabilitation for these people to adjust into the new world, different from the one they survived in. Since treatment is available and mandatory, offenders participating in such counselling can turn their lives around. However, some people consider mandatory counselling as forcibly putting a person under medication, which they think of as unethical. It leaves the patient with no choice, as they are given the ultimatum of choosing counselling or incarceration. The most common issue is overcrowding. These courts and mental health asylums are almost always crowded and full, and hence patients have to wait a long time for their chance to seek counselling. The government only has to implement any or all of these guidelines. Even if people are suffering mentally, they still must be treated equally, and no less, under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, and the Government is obligated to make sure these rights are honored. Instead of considering them as a potential threat, the citizens must learn to adapt and provide to their needs.