#Guardianship

Bombay High Court affirms that guardians can sell an incapacitated ward's immovable property for her welfare, even without explicit consent, under parens patriae jurisdiction. The ruling clarifies that fiduciary duty extends to liquidating assets when necessary for the ward's upkeep, setting a precedent for guardianship disputes involving elderly or mentally incapacitated individuals.

The Madras High Court invoked its Article 226 powers to appoint children as legal guardians of their comatose mother, enabling them to sell property and access bank accounts for medical care. This ruling establishes that constitutional courts can fill statutory gaps to protect the welfare of incapacitated individuals, setting a precedent for guardianship where formal legal provisions are silent.

The Delhi High Court holds that requiring physically present IHBAS medical evaluations for severely incapacitated patients violates the RPWD Act’s mandate of reasonable accommodation. Private treating doctors’ reports must be accepted as legally sufficient, ensuring dignity and access to justice for those with irreversible cognitive and physical disabilities.

Delhi High Court rules that a minor's passport can be reissued without the father's name where the mother has sole custody and guardianship under a court-approved agreement, and the father has abandoned parental rights. The judgment reinforces that administrative authorities must respect judicial custody orders under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Madras High Court mandates mediation and child counselling in guardianship disputes, prioritizing confidentiality and the child’s welfare over adversarial litigation. The ruling sets a precedent for integrating professional counselling into interim parenting arrangements, ensuring decisions align with the child’s best interests under the Guardians and Wards Act.

Punjab & Haryana HC allows limited guardianship over specific assets (bank accounts, gold, motorcycle) for a spouse in a vegetative state, without granting general guardianship. The ruling clarifies that courts may tailor guardianship powers under the Surekha v. Axis Bank framework, balancing medical incapacity with asset protection needs.