Uttaranchal High Court: The present writ petition was filed by petitioner-wife for the appointment of a Guardian for her husband, as he was in a comatose state. A Single Judge Bench of Pankaj Purohit, J., appointed petitioner as the Guardian of her husband regarding his properties, bank accounts, and for all such acts that were necessary to the best interest of her husband.
As there was no law regarding the appointment of a guardian of a person in comatose state, counsel for petitioner relied on Shobha Gopalkrishnan v. State of Kerala, WP(C) No. 37278 of 2018 (‘Shobha Gopalkrishnan Case’), wherein the Kerala High Court issued certain guidelines in relation to the said issue.
The Court stated that it was necessary that the condition of the person lying in a comatose state should be ascertained by examining him, through a duly constituted medical board of whom one member should be a qualified Neurologist. The Court took note of condition no. 3 of the guidelines issued by the Kerala High Court in Shobha Gopalkrishnan Case (supra) and stated that a Revenue Authority not below the rank of Tehsildar was also required to submit a report with relevant facts and figures including the particulars of close relatives, their financial condition and other aspect of petitioner and her husband.
On 25-09-2024, this Court had directed Respondent 3, Chief Medical Officer, Nainital to coordinate with the Director, Medical Health, Kumaon Region to constitute a medical board (one member being Neurologist) and to examine petitioner’s husband, who was presently residing in his home, in a comatose state. The Medical Board stated that petitioner’s husband was in a comatose and bedridden state, and he also owned some property.
The Court noted that there was no opposition from the side of the respondents who include brother, family members, and partner in the property of petitioner’s husband, if the petitioner was appointed as Guardian of her husband.
Thus, the Court allowed the writ petition and appointed petitioner as Guardian of her husband in respect of the moveable or immovable property recorded in his name and to deal with the bank accounts of her husband and further to do all such acts as were necessary to the best interest of her husband. The Court clarified that petitioner as Guardian was also entitled to sign any documents which were required to be signed by her husband.
The Court stated that if there was any misuse of power or misappropriation of funds or non-extension of requisite care and protection or support regarding the treatment and other requirements of the person lying in comatose state, it was open to bring up the matter for further consideration of this Court to re-open and revoke the power, to take appropriate action against the person concerned, who was appointed as the Guardian and to appoint another person/public authority/Social Welfare Officer (whose official status was equal to the post of District Probation Officer) as the Guardian.
The Court stated that the Guardianship awarded by this Court could be revoked by petitioner’s husband, in case he recovers and attains the healthy life.
[Kamakshee Bisht v. State of Uttarakhand, 2024 SCC OnLine Utt 3305, decided on 07-11-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Sandeep Kothari, Counsel for the petitioner.
For the Respondents: Devendra Pant, Standing Counsel for the State; Tarun Pande, Counsel holding brief of Ashish Joshi, Counsel for Respondent 5; Siddhartha Sah, Counsel for Respondent 6; Siddharth Jain, Counsel for Respondent 7; Abhilasha Tomar, Counsel for Respondents 8 to 11.
