Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

12. The final status report dated 22nd December 2022 issued by the Medical Board consisting of Administrator (One Stop Centre), Associate Professor (GIPMER), Medical Officer (South East District) and the Tehsildar (Defence Colony) also confirms these facts.

13. This Court notices that such persons who are in a vegetative state are unable to take decisions for themselves, however, there is no mechanism provided in law under the RPWD Act, 2016 or the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 for appointment of guardians to take care of such persons and their assets. This legal vacuum was considered in detail by this Court in the judgment dated 29th October, 2021 passed in W.P. (C) 1271/2020 titled S.D. vs. GNCTD & Ors. where this Court had exercised parens patriae jurisdiction while constituting a guardianship committee. The relevant part of the said judgment is as under:

216. While exercising parens patriae jurisdiction, Courts used to apply the principle of "best interest of the individual". However, with the introduction of the UNCRPD, "best interest" of the individual has to be in the light of the "wills and preferences" of the individual. The same could be determined by means of advance directives and in the absence of advance directives, facts and circumstances which point towards the wishes/intent of the concerned person. Thus, the "wills and preferences" of the mentally ill person have to be considered by the Court in deciding the manner in which care is to be given.
13. Overriding all these is the doctrine of parens patriae, one that was discussed by the Supreme Court in Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v Union of India and Ors, and more recently in Shafin Jahan v Asokan KM 2023/DHC/000049 & Ors. The Supreme Court has said that the parens patriae doctrine may be invoked in a Constitutional Court in exercise of its jurisdiction wherever the welfare of the person, be it a child or a person who is mentally ill, needs protection. The doctrine is invoked to meet the ends of justice. It is not to be applied blindly in every case, but in exceptional cases where the subject of the petition is not mentally or physically capable (or is of a very young age) and where there is no other parent or legal guardian. This is perhaps a reversal of the usual guardian-and-ward doctrine. There, a birth parent is the natural guardian of the person and property of the minor child. But reverse situations have often come to court, where it is the parent who needs care from the child. The law does not explicitly or automatically recognise the child as the legal guardian of the parent, and it is for this purpose that the parents parens patriae principle is invoked to provide precisely such relief. In Rajni Hariom Sharma V Union of India & Anr, a Division Bench of this Court had before it the claim of a wife to be appointed the guardian of her husband, said to be in a vegetative state. In paragraph 17, the Division Bench said:
17.2 On the crucial issue as to relief that may be granted to the petitioner by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it was noticed 2023/DHC/000049 that there is no statutory provision governing the field relating to appointment of guardian of a person lying in a comatose condition or in a vegetative state. This Court referred to and deliberated upon the doctrine of parens patriae whereafter it was held that in a case like this it is the court alone as the parens patriae which must take the ultimate decision though views of the near relatives, next friend and doctors must be given due weightage. After referring to decisions of various High Courts including our High Court, this Court examined the width and plenitude of the power of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Aruna Ramchadra Shanbaug Vs. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454, and held that when the High Court exercises jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it does so to further the cause of justice. It was held as under: