International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research

E-ISSN: 2582-2160   •   Impact Factor: 9.24

A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal

Call for Paper Volume 7, Issue 2 (March-April 2025) Submit your research before last 3 days of April to publish your research paper in the issue of March-April.
Submit Research Paper Join as a Reviewer

Plagiarism is checked by the leading plagiarism checker TurnItIn

Call for Paper

Volume 7 Issue 2
March-April 2025

Submit your research paper

Indexing Partners
Academia Advanced Sciences Index Bielefeld Academic Search Engine CiteSeer DRJI Google Scholar Independent Search Engine & Directory Network ISI (International Scientific Indexing) Issuu Mendeley Research Networks
RefSeek ResearcherId - Thomson Reuters ResearchGate Scirus Scribd Semantic Scholar UTeM - Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka Wiki for Call for Papers WorldCat Zenodo

Decoding the Insanity Defence

Author(s) Astha Adhikari
Country India
Abstract The insanity defence exempts the mentally ill from criminal liability when they cannot appreciate the nature or consequences of their acts. The underpinning of the insanity defence is found in landmark cases like the McNaughton's Case and the ALI Test, among others. It reflects the principle that there can be no guilt without a proper act and a culpable mental state. Its application in this area falls at the interface of many complex questions on burden of proof, malingering, and standards of proof which raises expectations on scientifically validated psychiatric evaluation and procedural clarity. This defence also demands rigors for safeguards against its misuse and fairness in its practice. In Nepal, though the insanity defence is an established defence, it nonetheless remains plagued by judicial inconsistency, especially with regard to burden of proof. While the burden of proving unsoundness of mind normally lies with the accused, courts have in some instances shifted the burden onto the prosecution which results in erratic jurisprudence and precedents. These gaps indicate a reform that needs to be done which includes setting up clear evidentiary standards, better access to forensic psychiatrists, and improving collaboration between the legal and mental health sectors. By attending to these issues, Nepal will have considerably enhanced the fairness and harmony of its insanity defence with international norms.
Published In Volume 6, Issue 6, November-December 2024
Published On 2024-12-28
DOI https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i06.34155
Short DOI https://doi.org/g8xgnd
View / Download PDF File

Share this



E-ISSN 2582-2160
CrossRef

CrossRef DOI is assigned to each research paper published in our journal.

IJFMR DOI prefix is
10.36948/ijfmr

Downloads
Research Paper Format Copyright Permission Form and Undertaking Form Cover Page Vol 7 Isu 2Cover Page Vol 7 Isu 1Cover Page Vol 6 Isu 6

All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.

CC-BY-SA Open Access

About IJFMR
Fees & Payment
Current Issue
Publication Archive 		Submit Research Paper
Track Submission Status
Publication Guidelines
Publication Ethics
Peer Review & Plagiarism 		Join as a Reviewer
Editors & Reviewers
Reviewer Referral Program
Get Reviewer Membership Certi. 		Website/Journal Policies
Usage Policy
Content Policies
Privacy Policy
Contact Us +91-9687-828-838 editor@ijfmr.com