HC appoints daughters as guardians of bedridden man; says court cannot remain mute spectator
Mumbai, The Bombay High Court has appointed two daughters as guardians of their 73-year-old bedridden father, who suffered a brain injury during a cardiac arrest, noting that he was unable to take care of himself or his property.
A bench of Justice Abhay Ahuja, in its order of May 8, a copy of which was made available on Wednesday, said courts cannot remain a mute spectator to such situations.
The high court, while appointing the two daughters as guardians of their father, noted that the man was suffering from mental illness and was a 'person in a state of lunacy who is incapable of taking care of himself or managing his property'.
'The higher courts of our country exercise the 'parens patriae' jurisdiction as they cannot be mute spectators to a real life situation of the nature before this Court,' Justice Ahuja said.
As per the plea, the senior citizen suffered a brain injury in 2024, resulting in deprivation of oxygen and blood supply, during a cardiac arrest. As a consequence, he has been in a semi-conscious and incapacitated state and is bedridden till date.
The petition sought HC to appoint the two daughters as guardians of their father, as he is incapable of communication and is not even able to take care of his basic personal needs.
The petition was initially filed under the Guardian and Wards Act, by which a guardian can be appointed for the welfare of a minor alone.
The plea was later amended and sought for the daughters to be appointed as guardians of the senior citizen under Clause XVII of the Letters Patent.
Under Clause XVII of the Letters Patent, the high court has the power and authority with regard to the person and estate of 'infants, idiots and lunatics'.
A Letters Patent is a specific law under which an HC derives its subordinate piece of legislation and is a special law which prevails over the general law.
The high court said under the Mental Healthcare Act, mental illness means a substantial disorder of thinking, orientation that grossly impairs judgment and the ability to meet with the ordinary demands of life.
The court in its order noted that the man was unable to understand or take informed decisions, and that he requires constant care and attention.
The bench noted that this was definitely not a case of mental retardation. 'However, it can be said that this is a case of mental illness although the same may have arisen as a result of a cardiac arrest,' HC said.
'Lunacy refers to unsoundness of mind sufficient to incapacitate a person from civil transactions. It can also refer to a mental disorder as described in the definition of mental illness,' Justice Ahuja said.
Such mental illness where the person is incapable of taking care of himself or managing his assets, can be said to be a 'state of lunacy' and hence under the Letters Patent, the high court would have authority and jurisdiction with respect to the person and the estate of such a 'lunatic', HC said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
19 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Doctors are not slaves: Himachal high court
'The public interest in retaining manpower cannot override the individual's right to professional advancement,' ruled Himachal Pradesh high court (HC), while directing state government to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to a doctor for pursuing a super specialty course. Disposing of petition filed by Dr Pankaj Sharma, who challenged the rejection of his request for an NOC to pursue a DNB SS Medical Oncology course under the All India Quota, justice Sandeep Sharma quoted order of division bench from another petition: 'Doctors are not slaves and cannot be compelled to serve against their wishes if they are willing to forfeit bond money.' Advocate general Anup Rattan had argued that the state was facing an acute shortage of medical officers and could not afford to relieve specialists. Unimpressed by the submission, the court said: 'No doubt, this court cannot lose sight of the fact that there is a shortage of doctors in the state but that cannot be sole ground to stop progression of individual who, after his PG course, wants to do super specialty, that too at his own expense.' 'Needless to say, once bond money is deposited, person concerned cannot be compelled to work against his wishes,' read the HC order. Dr Sharma, currently posted as senior resident at Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru Government Medical College, Chamba, had completed his post-graduate degree in radiotherapy and was selected for a super specialty seat at Paras Hospital, Punjab. However, his application for NOC was denied by the director of health services on May 26 on the ground that he had not completed the mandatory one-year field posting after PG. Setting aside the order denying him NOC, the court directed the state to issue the NOC subject to his depositing ₹40 lakh as bond amount within a week and submitting a written undertaking that he would return to serve the state for five years after completing his course.
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
HC allows 12-yr-old rape survivor to terminate 28-week pregnancy
Nagpur: Affirming the woman's reproductive autonomy, the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court on Tuesday observed she can become pregnant by choice, irrespective of her marital status, and cannot be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy against her will. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The bench was hearing a plea filed on behalf of a 12-year-old rape survivor seeking medical termination of her 28-week pregnancy. A division bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Sachin Deshmukh observed that in cases of unwanted or incidental pregnancies, especially those resulting from sexual assault, the physical and mental burden overwhelmingly falls on the pregnant individual. The judges underscored that forcing a victim to continue such a pregnancy would be a direct assault on her dignity and autonomy, protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. Quoting extensively from recent Supreme Court judgments, the judges reiterated that the right of bodily autonomy rests solely with the woman or girl in question, irrespective of marital status. "It's the woman alone who has the right over her body and is the ultimate decision-maker on the question of whether she wants to undergo an abortion," the judges said. The minor approached the HC through counsel Soniya Gajbhiye seeking permission for termination of her late-stage pregnancy, which resulted from rape allegedly committed by her cousin uncle. The offence was registered on June 5 under various sections of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (Pocso). The medical board constituted by the govt medical college and hospital (GMCH) in Akola, expressed caution, noting the procedure would be high-risk due to the survivor's age and the advanced gestational stage. However, the Board did not flag a life-threatening risk. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It advised that a hysterotomy could be performed with high-risk parental consent and the patient's assent. Acknowledging these findings, the justices said: "There is no opinion that the life of the victim is at risk. Perhaps, the patient may develop complications. However, we are equally required to be sensitive to submissions of the petitioner's counsel that the victim and her parents are prepared to undergo the risk." The court further directed the GMCH dean to conduct the termination procedure "at the earliest" while strictly following safety protocols. It specified the team should include a paediatric surgeon, a gynaecological surgeon, and, if possible, a paediatric anaesthesiologist. Crucially, the court noted the legal route taken by the minor's family through the constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was both appropriate and necessary, given the extraordinary nature of the case and fundamental rights involved. In its concluding remarks, the judges emphasized that no authority, including the state, could compel a woman to carry a pregnancy that she does not wish to continue. "Such compulsion would strip her of the right to determine the immediate and long-term path her life would take," the bench ruled. The petition was allowed, and the court recorded the parents' undertaking to furnish the required high-risk consent, as well as the minor victim's assent to the procedure. Key Takeaways of HC Verdict Right to abortion is part of personal liberty and dignity under Article 21. Unwanted pregnancy affects mental and physical health State cannot force victim to carry a pregnancy against her wish No life threat to the victim; hysterotomy allowed with high-risk consent. Safety protocol must be strictly followed by an expert medical team. Assent of minor & parental consent to be recorded in the medical file
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Kerala HC decides to frame guidelines for expert panel reviewing medical negligence allegations
Kochi: High court has decided to frame guidelines governing the functioning of expert committees constituted to review allegations of medical negligence against doctors. The bench of Justice V G Arun appointed Advocate S Akash as amicus curiae to assist the court in formulating the guidelines. The court was hearing two petitions filed by doctors challenging the criminal proceedings initiated against them in their respective trial courts. The petitioners are facing prosecution under Section 304A of the IPC, alleging that patients under their care had died due to medical negligence. They contended that they were neither heard by the expert committee nor provided a copy of its report. In response, the additional director general of prosecution (ADGP) submitted that no procedural guidelines currently exist regarding the functioning of such expert committees. HC observed that the absence of clear guidelines could adversely affect the right to a fair trial of the accused. It stressed that it is essential for the committee to consider the doctor's explanation before finalising its report and to furnish a copy of the report to the concerned doctor, thereby enabling them to challenge or appeal it, if necessary. The bench also requested the ADGP to submit suggestions regarding the structure and content of the proposed guidelines and adjourned the matter to July 17.
