A Delhi sessions court has ended criminal proceedings against Mahender Singh, accused in a 2000 kidnapping-for-ransom case involving an alleged ₹ 2 crore demand, after medical assessments established that he was incapable of understanding court proceedings or defending himself because of schizophrenia.
In an order dated October 15, Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi of Saket Courts directed that Singh remain at Nav Chetna, a halfway and long-stay home in Rohini, and continue psychiatric treatment at the Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences (IHBAS), Delhi. The court declined to hand him over to his family, which had expressed its inability to care for him.
“The legal system possesses both the structure and the soul to protect the most vulnerable,” the judge observed, highlighting the responsibility of courts towards accused persons whose mental illness leaves them unable to defend themselves.
The case dates back to October 13, 2000, when an FIR was registered at Malviya Nagar police station over the alleged abduction of Subhash Chand Batra and his driver, Santosh Kumar. According to the prosecution, the two were detained under threats of death or harm, and a ransom of ₹ 2 crore was demanded from Batra’s son, Sanjay Batra. The case was registered under Sections 364A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, relating to kidnapping for ransom and criminal conspiracy.
Several co-accused were tried separately and convicted, with their appeals pending before the Delhi High Court, according to the order. Singh, who had absconded, was arrested in May 2015. A supplementary chargesheet was filed against him, and charges were framed in September 2016.
His own trial, however, was repeatedly disrupted by his deteriorating mental health. Court records documented hospitalisations and severe mental instability. In December 2025, Singh was brought back before the court by his family and the investigating officer after he had gone untraceable and was found wandering.
A Standing Medical Board at IHBAS subsequently assessed his ability to understand the charges, comprehend the consequences of the proceedings and defend himself. Reports dated February 25 and August 4, 2026, diagnosed schizophrenia accompanied by moderate depressive episodes and concluded that Singh was unfit to stand trial, requiring continued psychiatric treatment, medication and constant supervision.
The court considered the safeguards under Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs proceedings involving accused persons of unsound mind. While the prosecution stressed that the statutory requirements had to be strictly met, the defence argued that continuing the trial served no purpose in light of the medical evidence.
The judge accepted that Singh could not stand trial but ruled out his return to family custody. His wife, Sunita, and sons, Naresh Kumar and Harish Kumar, had appeared before the court on several occasions. His wife told the judge that the family was unable to look after him. The court found that ensuring uninterrupted treatment and preventing harm to Singh or others would be difficult without institutional care.
Singh was therefore directed to remain at Nav Chetna until further orders, with treatment continuing at IHBAS or another designated mental health establishment.
“No purpose would be served to keep the sessions case pending on the docket of this Court,” the judge held.
The court clarified that the order was not an acquittal on the merits of the kidnapping allegations. If Singh regains the mental fitness required to stand trial, the prosecution may seek appropriate legal recourse.
Referring to the Delhi High Court’s 2025 judgment in State v. Neeraj, the judge underscored the need to balance an accused person’s dignity and rights with public safety.
