IBC Moratorium | Criminal Court Cannot Direct Disbursal Of Corporate Debtor's Assets To Complainant Pending CIRP: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Failure To Implead Company As Accused Renders Complaint Fatally Defective; Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Used To Cure Such Fundamental Defect: Supreme Court 'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case 'Every Lawyer Has A Duty To Act Decently': Supreme Court Modifies Suspension Of Advocate For Misconduct In Court Premises Mere Declaration Of 'Transitional Area' Under Article 243-Q(1)(a) Of Constitution Does Not Automatically Convert Rural Area Into Urban Area: Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order, Terms Non-Compliance With Natural Justice A "Travesty Of Constitutional Guarantees" 'Certiorari Is Not Appellate': Supreme Court Rejects Plea In Decades-Old Co-operative Society Membership Dispute Victim Must Authorize Settlement: Supreme Court Rules Informants Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Without Real Victim's Consent State Cannot Pick And Choose: Supreme Court Restores Right To Retrospective Regularisation For Daily Wage Employees Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment of Plaint After Commencement Of Trial Cannot Be Allowed Without Proving Due Diligence: Supreme Court Discrepancy Between Ocular Testimony And Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Order VI Rule 17 & Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter Claim Cannot Be Permitted After Trial Concludes When Party Fails To Pay Court Fees Initially: Supreme Court Nominee Holds Insurance Proceeds In Trust For Legal Heirs; Supreme Court Directs Equitable Distribution Pending Succession Proceedings PC Act | Court Must Impose Statutory Minimum Imprisonment Upon Conviction Under Sections 7 And 13(2): Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Official Caught In Factional Crossfire Retaliatory Counterblasts Cannot Be Used As Weapons Of Harassment: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Over Civil Land Dispute Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Court Must Defer Question Of Ad-Valorem Court Fee To Evidence When Possession Status Is Disputed: Supreme Court Minor Shortfall In Earnest Money Deposit Does Not Vitiate Auction Sale If It Causes No Prejudice: Supreme Court 'Flimsy And Untenable': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused In Gruesome 'Petrol-Burning' Murder Case Parity Is Not A Mechanical Mathematical Formula: Supreme Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Murder Accused Article 142 Constitution of India | Supreme Court May Protect Retiral Benefits Of Employees Whose Caste Certificates Are Invalidated In Exceptional Cases Omission Of CGST Rule 96(10) Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Supreme Court Mere Marking Does Not Prove Contents: Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Law In Testamentary Proceedings Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Determine Arbitrability Of Claims Including Excepted Matters: Supreme Court Arbitration Agreement Can Be Incorporated Into A Personal Guarantee Through A Composite Transaction: Supreme Court

Kerala High Court Invokes Parens Patriae Doctrine, Grants Custody of Autistic Ward to Mother

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment delivered on 10th July 2023, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam exercised its powers under the parens patriae doctrine and granted custody of an autistic ward to the mother. The case, WP(CRL.) No. 296 of 2023, involved petitioner Santha Kumari, aged 63 years, who sought custody of her 39-year-old autistic daughter after the demise of her husband, who was previously appointed as the ward's guardian under the National Trust Act.

The court, comprising Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha, carefully analyzed Sections 10 and 14 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation, and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999. The Act aims to establish a National Trust for the welfare of persons with disabilities and provides for guardianship in specific situations.

The court took into consideration the present health condition of the ward, who required round-the-clock care and was unaware of her father's demise. Previously, the ward was placed under the care of the Grace Home Charitable Society, a registered institution for persons with disabilities.

While the District Administration and the Grama Panchayat initially hesitated to hand over custody, they later expressed no objection to entrusting the ward's custody to the petitioner, subject to the court's assurance that proper care and protection would be provided. The court directed the petitioner to file an affidavit confirming her capability to care for the ward, which she duly presented.

The affidavit revealed that the petitioner, Santha Kumari, possessed sufficient assets, including property and fixed deposits, and had a stable income through a small business and selling vegetables and coconuts. Her eldest daughter, Mrs. Prasanthi, also affirmed her willingness to help care for the ward. Based on this evidence, the court was convinced that the petitioner could provide the necessary care and protection required by the ward.

The court emphasized the exceptional nature of the case, wherein it invoked the parens patriae doctrine, granting the custody of the autistic ward to her mother. The doctrine allows the court to act as a guardian in extraordinary situations to protect the welfare and best interests of the concerned individual.

 This landmark judgment sets a precedent for similar cases, reaffirming the constitutional court's authority to act in the best interests of those unable to protect themselves fully. The decision is expected to have a significant impact on guardianship cases involving persons with disabilities, ensuring their well-being and care in appropriate family environments.

The judgment cites, "In the said view of the matter, we have no doubt in our mind that the petitioner would be in a position to take care of the ward properly, and the entrustment of the custody of the ward to the petitioner will not, in any manner, impair the welfare of the ward. We take this view also for the reason that the petitioner is none other than the mother of the ward, and no one else can give to the ward all that a mother can give to her."

This decision reflects the High Court's commitment to uphold the rights and welfare of persons with disabilities, ensuring their protection and inclusion in society.

Date of Decision: 10th July 2023

SANTHA KUMARI vs STATE OF KERALA

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Santha_Vs_State_10July23_Kerl^.pdf"]

Latest Legal News