Petitioner in SC claims his brain is being controlled with device
text_fields
New Delhi: After a man approached the Supreme Court with a petition claiming that certain individuals are using certain tech to control his brain, the court dismissed the petition, calling it “bizarre”, NDTV reported.
The petitioner is a teacher, and he claimed that the accused obtained a “human brain reading machinery” from the Central Forensic Scientific Laboratory (CFSL) and is using it to manipulate his brain and demanded a court order to deactivate the alleged device. However, the court of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah said that they could not find any grounds to interfere before dismissing the case.
The case was first listed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and the teacher claimed that the alleged device was being operated on him without his consent. At the court, the CFSL and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) submitted a counter affidavit as a response, saying that no forensic examination had ever been conducted on the petitioner. They asserted that no machine was used on the petitioner to monitor or control his brain.
Following that, the high court dismissed the petition in November 2022, observing that the petitioner’s request has no basis.
However, the petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court, challenging the high court order. After that, the top court heard the petition and expressed astonishment at the bizarre nature of the claim. But, instead of dismissing the petition immediately, the court directed the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC) to interact with the petitioner in his native language to understand his concerns clearly.
The SCLSC filed a report to the court after interacting with the petitioner. In the report, SCLSC confirmed that the petitioner’s request was an order to deactivate the alleged device controlling his brain.
In its final ruling, the apex court observed, “This is the bizarre prayer(s) which has been made by the petitioner whose specific allegation is that there is some machine which is being used and operated at the hands of some persons, by which the ‘brain' of the petitioner is being controlled. We see no scope or reason as to how we can interfere in this matter.”
The court said that the claim was found to be without merit before dismissing the petition.
