Re: Jason Vasanthkumar
ORB File No: 7957
Hearing held on: March 4, 2026
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
700 Gordon Street, Whitby, Ontario
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley
Members: Dr. P. Prendergast
Dr. S. Wiseman
Mr. A. Mete
Hon. A. Sosna
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Jason Vasanthkumar
Counsel: Ms. R. Levin
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. K. Dows
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald (by zoom)
AMENDED REASONS FOR DECISION
(Dated: April 9, 2026)
Please see underlined changes to original reasons made April 9, 2026.
Introduction:
On October 8, 2021 Mr. Vasanthkumar was found not criminally responsible on account of a mental disorder (NCR) on charges of possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, discharge firearm with intent, careless use of firearm, assault with a weapon, and uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm, contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) dated December 1, 2025, detaining him at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, Whitby, Ontario (“Ontario Shores”/ “the hospital”).
By letter dated January 8, 2026, the hospital advised the Board that Mr. Vasanthkumar had been readmitted to hospital on December 31, 2025. As of the date of the letter, Mr. Vasanthkumar remained in hospital. As a result, Mr. Vasanthkumar’s liberties had been restricted for a period of greater than seven days, requiring a Restriction of Liberty hearing pursuant to s.672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.
By letter dated February 19, 2026, the hospital advised the Board that Mr. Vasanthkumar had been discharged from the hospital on February 3, 2026, but had been readmitted on February 12, 2026, where he remained. Therefore, a second Restriction of Liberty hearing was required.
On March 4, 2026, the Board convened a hearing at Ontario Shores pursuant to s.678.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review the restriction of liberty from December 31, 2025 to February 3, 2026 and the restriction of liberty from February 12, 2026 to the date of the hearing. Mr. Vasanthkumar attended the hearing and was represented by counsel Ms. Rita Levin. Dr. Pallandi, Mr. Vasanthkumar’s Most Responsible Physician, testified.
Position of the Parties:
- All parties agreed that the only issue before the panel was the review of the decisions to readmit Mr. Vasanthkumar to hospital and the ensuing restriction of liberty. Mr. Dow, on behalf of the hospital submitted that on both occasions in the initial decision to readmit Mr. Vasanthkumar to hospital and the ongoing admission were necessary and appropriate and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure available to the hospital to manage Mr. Vasanthkumar’s risk to the safety of the public. Ms. MacDonald on behalf of the Ministry of the Attorney General, and Ms. Levin concurred with the hospital’s position. Thus, a joint submission with respect to both restrictions of liberty was put before the panel.
Findings:
- Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence, and the joint position of the parties, the Board finds that the decision to readmit Mr. Vasanthkumar on December 31, 2025 and keep him in hospital until February 3, 2026 was necessary and appropriate. Further, the Board finds the decision to readmit Mr. Vasanthkumar again on February 12, 2026 and continue to detain him in hospital was necessary and appropriate.
Recent Procedural History:
On August 7, 2025 at the annual review of his detention, Mr. Vasanthkumar was discharged subject to conditions. Amongst others, the conditions included that he reports to the person in charge at Ontario Shores and submits samples of his urine and/or breath samples upon request to the person in charge at Ontario Shores. Notably, the prohibition set out in the previous Disposition Order that he abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant, was removed.
Two months later, by letter dated October 6, 2025, Ontario Shores notified the Ontario Review Board (“the Board”) that Mr. Vasanthkumar voluntarily admitted himself to the General Forensic Rehabilitation Unit after experiencing psychiatric decompensation following substance use, and passive suicidal ideation. While in hospital Mr. Vasanthkumar assaulted a co-patient. He was charged with assault and subsequently placed on a Form 3 under the Mental Health Act.
On November 25, 2025 pursuant to Section 672.81(2) of the Criminal Code, the Board convened a hearing to review the August 7, 2025 Disposition. The Board found that a continuation of the conditional discharge would not be sufficient to manage his risk, that Mr. Vasanthkumar represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a detention order including reinstatement of the prohibition that he abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicants.
Index Offence:
- The allegations giving rise to the index offence are summarized in the December 30, 2025 Reasons for Disposition.
On October 12, 2020, the police were dispatched to a weapons call in the City of Vaughan. The complainant reported that a male on the street [later identified as Jason Vasanthkumar] was possibly carrying a knife and threatening a civilian. The male left the area but returned, firing a rifle at the same civilian as he chased him up the street. The police approached Jason Vasanthkumar and advised him he was under arrest. He ignored their demands and walked up the porch of a residence. He was tasered and placed under arrest. He asked the officers why he was tasered, as he wanted to be shot. The police seized a bolt action pellet rifle located on the porch of the residence.
Current Psychiatric Diagnosis:
Mr. Vasanthkumar is diagnosed with a Schizoaffective disorder, Polysubstance use disorder (in remission) and Cluster B personality traits.
Mr. Vasanthkumar is 32 years old and single. He was born in India and immigrated to Canada at age eight with his parents. He completed high school and then enrolled in a neuroscience program at McMaster University, which he left in the first year. Since then, he has been employed in various on-and-off jobs. He has no previous criminal record.
Because of difficulties related to the cultural transition from India to Canada, Mr. Vasanthkumar has had a long history of strife with his family. As a result, over the years he has had no fixed address.
Substance Abuse History:
- Mr. Vasanthkumar first used cannabis when he was 18 years old, but discontinued use for approximately two years because, according to him, cannabis heightened his anxiety and made him feel paranoid. He returned to daily cannabis use in 2020 up to the date of the index offences in October of 2020. While on bail pending trial on the index offences, he discontinued cannabis use until April 2021. He then resumed regular use and became noncompliant with psychiatric medication, leading to his reincarceration in May 2021.
Psychiatric History:
Mr. Vasanthkumar had no history of admissions to hospital with respect to mental health-related issues prior to the index offences in 2020. However, after his arrest he reported experiencing anxiety issues anddifficulties with “thought insertion and hearing voices”.
While on bail for the index offences, Mr. Vasanthkumar was admitted to hospital under the Mental Health Act when his parents contacted the police, advising that he was planning to kill his father. While in hospital Mr. Vasanthkumar reported a number of psychotic symptoms, including hearing voices and experiencing paranoia. He was aggressive and threatening, and required mechanical restraints on at least two occasions. He was diagnosed with having a bipolar one disorder, recurrent, episode manic, severe, with mixed and psychotic features, cannabis use disorder, as well as anxiety disorder and cluster C personality traits.
Dr. D. Palladini’s Evidence at November 25, 2025 Hearing:
Dr. Pallandi testified at the annual review of the Disposition on August 7, 2025, that, because Mr. Vasanthkumar had been doing well, was substance-free for a lengthy period and had obtained employment, he was discharged with the prohibition banning use of substances removed.
However, within weeks of the review, it was determined that Mr.Vasanthkumar was using cannabis and exhibiting psychotic conduct. He was readmitted to hospital where, as previously reviewed, he assaulted a patient and was criminally charged.
Dr. D. Palladini’s Evidence at March 4, 2026 Hearing:
- Dr. Pallandi adopted the contents of the February 26, 2026 Report to the ORB pursuant to s.672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code (Exhibit 2). In part, the Report reads as follows:
Mr. Vasanthkumar was last seen before the Ontario Review Board on November 25, 2025, for a discretionary hearing. At the time, after admission to the hospital, which occurred shortly after the removal of the prohibition on the use of substances at his last annual hearing, a Detention Order was once again put in place, along with the prohibition on the use of substances.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF ADMISSION 1
By December 9, 2025, a change in his mental status was observed. He had returned to the use of regular alcohol and exhibited more significant insomnia…on December 31, 2025, he admitted to staff that he had used crystal methamphetamine. This is a substance that was relatively novel to him and certainly novel to the team during the course of his oversight in the Forensic Outpatient Service. As a consequence, he was admitted to hospital to manage risk and to undergo detoxification.
While his mental state was not significantly different, and he did not display any behavioural problems, his urinary THC (a byproduct of the use of cannabinoids) remained positive for a lengthy period of time. His privileges were restricted in an effort to secure a negative urine screen. Eventually this did transpire….
CIRCUMSTANCES OF ADMISSION 2
[After he was discharged to the community]..Mr. Vasanthkumar remained in the community for a very short period of time. He was stringently counseled against the use of substances given their negative effect upon his mental state and secondly their propensity to increase his risk for problematic behaviour.
Mr. Vasanthkumar’s urinary drug screens for THC returned as positive on both February 6 and 9, 2025. He denied use. Given our concerns for his returning to the use of substances…he was once again readmitted to hospital for detoxification risk management.
COURSE IN HOSPITAL
Once again, there has been little clear or sustained change in his mental state. He has not engaged in problematic behaviours. Despite once again a relatively lengthy hospitalization, his urine has yet to clear up cannabinoid metabolites..
SUMMARY
Mr. Vasanthkumar had been doing well for a relatively lengthy period of time. Once the prohibition on the use of substances was removed, he has deteriorated in many respects and has required several hospitalizations including the last 2… He appears to have quite impaired insight into the need to abstain and also impaired insight into the effect of substances upon his mental state and risk…
When testifying and asked by a member of the panel, why after a long absence from substance use Mr. Vasanthkumar would return to using, Dr. Palladini noted that the return to use occurred shortly after the prohibition from use was removed; hence supervision and oversight were absent. Furthermore, he speculated that other factors played a role, namely, boredom/isolation set in; the novelty of experimenting with a new substance, crystal methamphetamine, was intriguing; and frustration over losing his employment because of the lengthy hospital stays for detoxification.
Dr. Palandi testified that when Mr. Vasanthkumar engages in substance use, his risk to the public increases. Mr. Vasanthkumar has difficulty exercising judgement and impulse control. The use of crystal methamphetamine, in particular is more concerning as it is a riskier substance, more powerful and potentially faster acting.
When asked whether the risk to the public is differentiated between the use of cannabis and the use of crystal methamphetamine, Dr. Palladini testified although the substances are different, both have significant negative impact.
Dr. Palandi indicated that the treatment team was aware that Mr. Vasanthkumar has a subsidized apartment in the community that suites his needs well. Every effort will be made to discharge Mr. Vasanthkumar back to the community as soon as possible.
Assessment and Conclusion:
Mr. Vasanthkumar suffers from a major mental illness, as well as polysubstance abuse disorder and cluster B personality traits. After being discharged in August 2025, with the removal of the prohibition from the use of substances, he quickly began to use cannabis. Unbeknownst to the clinicians and treatment team at Ontario Shores, he then added crystal methamphetamine to his substance use.
In November 2025 the Board reassessed the August 2025 Disposition. The Board found that a continuation of the conditional discharge would not be sufficient to manage his risk to the safety of the public, and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a Detention Order including reinstatement of the prohibition that Mr. Vasatrhkumar abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicants.
Despite the November 2025 Disposition, Mr. Vasanthkumar continued to use substances as evidenced in the drug screening tests which returned positive through February 2026. Despite the results, Mr. Vasanthkumar denied substance use, although as noted by Dr. Pallandi he “was stringently counseled against she use of substances given their negative effect on his mental state and secondly their propensity to increase his risk of problematic conduct”.
Further, Dr. Pallandi’s evidence was not challenged nor undermined when he reported that Mr. Vasanthkumar, “appears to have quite impaired insight into the need to abstain and also impaired insight into the effect of substances upon his mental state and risk…”
The panel finds that the decision to admit Mr. Vasanthkumar on December 31, 2025 was necessary and appropriate and represented the least restrictive and least onerous measure available to the hospital to manage Mr. Vasanthkumar’s risk to the safety of the public. It weas clear that he had returned to problematic substance use and his mental status had changed. The treatment team acted swiftly in order to prevent a further deterioration. Mr. Vasanthkumar was discharged on February3, 2026, as soon as his urine drug screens were negative.
Similarly, the panel finds that the decision to admit Mr. Vasanthkumar on February 12, 2026 was necessary and appropriate in order to interrupt his substance use and manage his risk to the public.
The above finding reflects counsel’s joint submission that a continuation of the terms and conditions of the present Disposition Order be maintained. The recommendation is not binding on the panel. However, the panel has no reason to disagree with the recommendation.
DATED this 9^th^ day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Alexander Sosna
Legal Member
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board