Wife admitted husband to a mental health centre after divorce dispute, he spent 42 days there; Uttarakhand High Court ordered him to be released

A man moved the Uttarakhand High Court with a habeas corpus petition, saying he was being held at a Dehradun facility against his wishes. He told the court he had been there for 42 days and wanted to go home. The petition named the facility, Ashirwad Wellness Samiti, as a respondent along with the state.

Why Was He Admitted To The Mental Health Facility
The man and his wife are currently going through a divorce. According to the case, it was his wife who had him admitted to the facility. His lawyer argued this was done without his consent and without following the process the law requires before someone can be kept at such a centre against their will.


What Did The Facility's Lawyer Argue
Appearing for the facility, the lawyer told the court the man was free to leave whenever he wanted. The facility also claimed it was following the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. To support the admission, the lawyer pointed to a medical examination carried out on the day the man arrived, along with a blood test done the same day, which the facility said led to the conclusion that admission was necessary.

What Does The Law Actually Require
The court turned to Section 89 of the Mental Healthcare Act, which allows what is called a supported admission, for up to 30 days, when a person cannot make treatment decisions on their own. But the provision sets a high bar. It requires the person to be examined independently by a psychiatrist and, separately, by another mental health professional or medical practitioner. Both must independently conclude that the person poses a risk of harm to himself or to others, or is unable to care for himself.

Did The Facility Meet This Requirement
When the bench asked whether any such joint certification existed for the man, the facility's lawyer admitted it did not. The admission had been based on a single doctor's examination and a blood test, not the two-professional certification the law demands. A medical report on record also noted that the man had a history of alcohol and ganja use, but the judges made it clear that addiction by itself does not amount to mental illness under the Act.

What Did The District Magistrate's Report Show
The court had earlier directed the Dehradun district magistrate to look into how the facility was being run and to submit a report. The magistrate joined the hearing over video conferencing but told the judges he had not had time to go through the report prepared by his own office. Even so, it emerged during the hearing that the facility's registration had lapsed in August 2025 and was never renewed, and that it had recently shifted its location while continuing to operate with 28 other people housed there.

Also read: Bank restricted access to matured fixed deposits worth Rs 13.8 lakh, allowed customer to withdraw only Rs 50,000, ordered to pay Rs 14.15 lakh

What Did The Petitioner Tell The Court
The judges spoke with the man directly during the hearing. He repeated that he wanted to return home and confirmed the dispute with his wife was still unresolved. His counsel maintained throughout that there was no valid order or certificate that could justify keeping him at the facility for over a month.

What Did The Court Decide
The bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani and Justice Siddhartha Sah held that, without the certification required under Section 89, there was no basis to conclude the man was suffering from mental illness as defined under the law. With no valid paperwork backing the detention and the man himself asking to leave, the court said it had no option but to order his release. The petition was disposed of, and the man was allowed to go wherever he wished.