INSANITY IN CRIMINAL LAW

Introduction Criminal law in itself has quite some connotations. Basically it deals with all those wrongs and offences, which, due to having achieved a certain degree of gravity or seriousness, are classified and considered as offences against the State itself. Thus the state uses its considerable resources to personally sue to offender. There exists in criminal law alone, not only damages but penal activity. In other words the state with its authority metes out punishments and penalties. Thus, appropriate reliefs and concessions have to exist for special cases. The universally uniform practise is to test for mens rea or criminal intent. Basically there is no sort of strict or absolute liability whatsoever. This is because being convicted of criminal deeds is a lifechanging and sordid affair. Hence we have this provisional safeguard that automatically weeds out non culpable and equitably innocent victims of prosecution from liability. Broadly, across most legal systems, there exist pre set statutory or otherwise-derived defenses set in the law that ensure that the absence of mens rea becomes obvious, and is de jure qualification for acquittal. One such defense is insanity. It is of many names in many regions. (The obvious sociological relevance of this topic is about the concern of punishing innocent persons, as well as the contrasting argument of whether it is utilitarian to let people go because of this defense.