The PIL, filed by Mumbai resident Dr Harish Shetty, highlighted the plight of a woman who was rescued last year from a mental health facility after having languished there for 12 years even though she did not have any significant symptoms of mental illness.
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday asked the Maharashtra government to respond to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a psychiatrist seeking a report on the status of all inmates of mental health facilities in the state, and a review of their status for discharge as required under the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
The PIL, filed by Mumbai resident Dr Harish Shetty, highlighted the plight of a woman who was rescued last year from a mental health facility after having languished there for 12 years even though she did not have any significant symptoms of mental illness.
A bench of Justices S S Shinde and Sarang Kotwal directed Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni to appear on behalf of the government and assist the court.
”Considering the seriousness of the matter, we have asked the AG to appear in this case,” the HC said.
Advocate Pranati Mehra, who appeared for Dr Shetty, told the court that the PIL was prompted by the plight of the woman who had to spend over 12 years in an institution because her husband refused to take her back, and her paternal family too had initially abandoned her.
She was eventually reunited with her family, but there could be others who faced similar issues, advocate Mehra said.
The government pleader raised the issue that it was a civil petition and the bench headed by Justice Shinde was hearing only criminal cases.
This did not go down well with the court. “Can you be casual like this in such matters when the issue is to be handled with care? Serious issues are raised. These are issues related to public health at large. There is seriousness. This is not adversarial litigation,” the bench said.
The petition said that under the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, an inmate of a mental health facility can move the Mental Health Review Board to seek discharge upon recovery.
Kumbhakoni sought time from the court and said all the Supreme Court’s orders on the implementation of the Act will have to be looked into. The HC said it will hear the matter next on April 12.