IN RE: DEA TH OF 25 CHAINED INMATES IN ASYLUM FIRE IN TAMIL NADU versus .

Citation: [2002] 1 S.C.R. 839 · Decided: 05-02-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH, B.N. AGRAWAL, ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

r 
> 
IN RE: DEA TH OF 25 CHAINED INMATES IN ASYLUM FIRE 
A 
IN TAMIL NADU 
FEBRUARY 5, 2002 
[M.B. SHAH, B.N. AGRA WAL AND ARIJITPASAYAT, JJ.] 
B 
Mental Health Act, 1987: 
Ss. 2(1), 2(q) 3,4, and 5-Mentally ill persons-Treatment and care-
Fire in a mental asylum-25 mentally ill persons housed in the said mental 
... 
asylum and chained to poles/beds charred to death-Suo motu action by C 
Supreme Court-It was noticed that provisions of the Act were not being 
implemented by authorities concerned-Also failure on part of the Central/ 
State Governments/Union Territories to implement the Act and other laws-
Directiom given by Supreme Court to State Governments/Union Territories, 
inter nlia, to undertake district wise survey of registered/unregistered D 
institutions providing mental health services-Observations of norms for 
granting/refusing licences-Governments to establish, if not already 
established, State Mental Health Authority and to supervise through nodal 
agencies regulation, development and co-ordination of all activities with 
respect to mental health services and implement the Act and other laws-
Directions to Union of India/State Governments/Union territories to take steps E 
to set up one Central Government run mental hospital in each State/Union 
Territory and to take steps to set up full fledged State run mental hospitals 
in respective States/Union Territories--Compliance report to be submitted 
to the Court-Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities Protection of 
Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995-National Trust for Welfare of F 
Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple 
Disabilities Act, 1999. 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. 334 of2001. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) 
G 
Dr. A.M. Singhvi (A.C) and K. Ramamurthy Pranab Kumar Mullick 
(A.C.), Revathy Raghavan, Krishan Mahajan, Ms. Sunita Sharma, for Ms. 
Sushma Suri, Ranji Thomas, for Javed Mahmood Rao, Sanjay R. Hegde, V.G. 
Pragasam, Sanjay K. Shandilya for V.D. Khanna, A. Mariarputham, Prakash 
Shrivastava, Anil Shrivastav, T.V. Ratnam, K. Subba Rao, Kh. Nobin Singh, H 
839 
840 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2002] l S.C.R. 
A Ms. Rachna Srivastava, Ms. A. Subhashini, C. Siddhartha, K.L. Janjani, Y.P. 
Singh for Ajay K. Agrawal, Gopal Singh, Ms. Asha, G. Nair for Corporate Law 
Group, Tara Chandra Shanna, K.R. Sasiprabhu, Ranjan Mukherjee, Ms. 
~. .._ 
Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Anu Sawhney, Jayshree Anand, AAG. Punjab, Rajeev 
'Sharma, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, J.P. Dhanda, Geetanjali Mohan for B.S. Banthia, 
B S.V. Deshpande and Arup Banerjee for Ashok Mathur for'the appearing 
parties. 
The following Order oi the Court was delivered 
On the basis of submission note of the Registrar (J!!dicial) to a news 
item published in all leading national dailies about a gruesome tragedy in 
C which more than 25 mentally challenged patients housed irr a mental asylum 
at Ervadi in Rarnanathapuram district were charred to death, the patients could 
not escape the blaze as they had been chained to poles or be~, this Court 
took suo motu action. 
D 
After considering the factual report, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned 
senior counsel was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court and 
notice was also issued to the Union of India. 
Thereafter, by order dated 15.10.200 I this Court called for the report of 
the State of Tamil Nadu on the subject and also sought infonnation on the 
E topics which are mentioned, from the State Governments and Union 
Government on an affidavit of competent authority. 
Thereafter, when the matter was placed before this Court on 21.1.2002, 
most of the States sought extension of time for compliance with the order 
pas•i;;P by this Court. The matter was adjourned for 29.1.2002. On that day 
F also, some pf the State Governments again sought extension of time for 
compliance with the directions issued by this Court. Further, learned Amicus 
Curiae submitted that the Mental Health Act, 1987 (for short "the 1987 Act") 
is not at all implemented by the concerned authorities and there is failure on 
the part of Central/State Governments to implement the 1987 Act. 
G 
Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, learned Attorney General appearing on behalf of 
the Union Government submitted that the 1987 Act is for the benefit of 
mentally ill persons and is required to be implemented right earnestly. He 
submitted that the Centre would take appropriate action for implementation 
of the 1987 Act a
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.