Latest news with #GuardianandWardsAct
NDTV
22-05-2025
- Health
- NDTV
"Can't Be Mute Spectators": Court Appoints Daughters As Guardians Of Bedridden Man
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 (legal protector of citizens unable to protect themselves) 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.
Hindustan Times
21-05-2025
- Health
- Hindustan Times
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.
Indian Express
20-05-2025
- Indian Express
Surat family court puts stay on monkhood of a 12-year-old boy in Surat
A family court in Surat on Tuesday passed a stay order on the 'diksha' (monkhood) ceremony of a 12-year-old boy after his father, a Madhya Pradesh-based businessman, filed an application a day before. The ceremony was scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday. The parents of the child are separated and litigations regarding his legal custody are pending in the court. An invitation for event, which had gone viral on social media, was submitted to the court. In his arguments on Tuesday, the father's lawyer said, 'We came across the invitation card on social media platforms. We were shocked. When the case for the legal custody of the minor is pending in the court, how come his mother makes a decision solely regarding his monkhood. He (the father) is also an equal legal guardian of the boy. Once the boy attains monkhood, he has to cut all ties with his family and relatives and his worldly desires and walk on a religious path. The boy is a minor and immature. He does not know what is good and bad for him. Religion is not above the judiciary.' Meanwhile, the lawyer who appeared on the behalf of the boy's mother, said, 'The decision has been solely taken by my son. After our separation, my husband had never taken any initiative to take care of our son's education, or meet other financial requirements… and now he has come to demand the legal custody of our son.' The court, while putting the stay order on Tuesday, observed, 'Presently the custody of the boy is with his mother. The applicant, who is the father of the boy, has filed an application with family court in relation to the Guardian and Wards Act Section 7 and 25, (which) is still pending in the court and it is on the stage of evidence. The invitation card copy is submitted with the court, which says that the diksha ceremony is on 21st and 22nd May in Surat. The defense side had not objected on the genuinity of the invitation card. The defense side had not brought on record of the court that a mutual compromise process was going on. As per the Indian Constitution Article 25, every person has the right to follow his religion. The defense arguments on this cannot be accepted. A minor is not capable of taking decision for his future, till he attains 18 years of age. In this case, the minor is 12-yea-old and he is not mature enough to take decisions about his future…' Talking to The Indian Express, the mother's lawyer also said, 'We are not satisfied with the court order. We will first study the order in detail and decide on challenging it in the upper courts. We have also produced in the court scriptures, which state that there is a provision that allows a boy to attain monkhood after he attains the age of 8.' The lawyer for the boy's father, on the other hand, said, 'We are satisfied with the court order. The judge considered that there are over three litigations on the custody of the boy pending. Once he attains monkhood, the court order will be of no use.' The boy's father, a resident of Madhya Pradesh's Indore had got married to his mother, who hails from Surat, in 2008. Their son was born in 2013. Sources said that the couple used to fight frequently and eventually got separated. The woman returned to Surat to stay with her parents in 2016. She refused to go back to her husband's house and had also filed a complaint at Adajan police station in 2018 against her husband and his parents over alleged dowry demands and other domestic issues. The man and his parents later obtained anticipatory bail. The case, at present, is being regularly heard in court. The woman had also filed a domestic violence case against her husband, and filed an application in the Surat family court seeking maintenance from her husband for herself and her child. The boy's father, meanwhile, under the Guardians and Wards Act, had applied for the custody of his son in 2023. The decision is pending. He had also filed an application with the family court to get an interim custody of his son on April 24 this year, and the court is yet to decide on that as well.
