The Supreme Court on Friday directed that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) be made a party to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking effective implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. A bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar instructed petitioner Gaurav Kumar Bansal to file a formal application for adding the NHRC as a respondent.
PIL May Be Transferred to NHRC for Monitoring
As reported by Hindustan Times, the bench also indicated that it may consider transferring the PIL to the NHRC to oversee the implementation of the law. However, when Bansal suggested forming a committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to supervise the process, the bench refused, stating, “We cannot create a parallel mechanism just because the existing system has flaws.”
Centre Asked to Share Affidavit
In the meantime, the Court asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who appeared on behalf of the Centre, to share the government’s affidavit with the petitioner. The bench then scheduled the next hearing for three weeks later.
Background: Law Yet to See Full Implementation
The Supreme Court has consistently expressed concern over the lack of implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. The Act mandates the establishment of three key institutions: the Central Mental Health Authority, State Mental Health Authorities, and Mental Health Review Boards. On March 2, the Court directed the Centre to submit an affidavit detailing the establishment, functioning, and appointments of these bodies.
Initial Petition Flagged Rights Violations
The PIL, filed in 2018, argued that the failure of states and Union Territories to implement the Act amounted to a violation of citizens’ fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
Court Condemns Chaining of Patients in Asylum
Citing a distressing incident in a faith-based mental asylum in Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, the bench said that chaining persons with mental illness was a serious infringement of their dignity and a direct violation of Article 21. The court reviewed photographs of the patients and described the situation as a matter of grave concern.
Blatant Violation of the 2017 Act
The PIL emphasized that chaining individuals with mental illness directly violates the 2017 Act. The law guarantees every such person the right to live with dignity and protects them from cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Mental Health Crisis Underscored by National Survey
Referring to the National Mental Health Survey 2016, the petitioner highlighted the alarming state of mental health in India. According to the survey, approximately 14% of the population requires active mental health intervention. Nearly 2% suffer from severe mental disorders.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s latest directive marks a significant step toward the enforcement of the Mental Healthcare Act. The Court aims to ensure greater accountability by involving the NHRC. It also seeks to protect the rights of persons with mental illnesses across the country.