Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 9138
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SANDYA ANILKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE CHIEF SECRETARY – Respondent
WP 10453 / 2025
Court allows spouse to operate bank accounts of comatose husband for treatment, highlighting legislative gaps in guardianship laws.
Headnote:(A) Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 - Appointment of Guardian - Petitioner seeks appointment as guardian of husband in comatose state due to Guillain Barre Syndrome - Court allowed the petitioner's request to operate the husband's bank accounts for treatment and livelihood. (Paras 1, 10, 11)
(B) Legal Provisions - Absence of specific legislative provisions for guardianship of comatose patients highlighted - Court emphasizes need for legislative clarity. (Paras 16-22)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner's husband, Dr. Anil Kumar H.V., has been in a comatose state for over nine months due to Guillain Barre Syndrome, rendering him unable to manage his affairs. The petitioner seeks to operate his bank accounts for treatment and family livelihood.
Findings of Court:
The court finds the petitioner's request justified given the husband's medical condition and lack of legislative provisions for guardianship in such cases, allowing her to operate the accounts.
Issues: The main issues involved the legal framework for appointing a guardian for a comatose patient and the necessity for financial access for treatment and family support.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the petitioner, as the wife, should be allowed to operate the accounts, emphasizing the lack of legislative provisions for guardianship of comatose patients and the urgent need for financial support for treatment.
Result: Writ petition is allowed, and the petitioner is appointed as guardian.
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers:
"i. To appoint the Petitioner as Guardian of her husband Dr. Anil Kumar H.V., who is still lying in a I.C.U for more than 9 months and cannot write and sign any papers, comatose state an intensive care unit on mechanical ventilation.
ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus against Respondents N.2 to 4 allow the Petitioner to draw the money for day-today- treatment and for their livelihood.
iii. Pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard Shri H. Venkatesh Dodderi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri Shamanth Naik, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1; Smt. Divya Purandar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 and Shri Keerthi Kumar D. Naik, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:
The petitioner's husband, one Dr. Anil Kumar H.V. on 12.11.2024 is said to have retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. Just prior to his retirement, it is averred in the petition that the husband of the petitioner developed certain illness and had to be admitted to the hospital. It is from 23.06.2024, he is said to be in intensive care and on a ventilator. On 29.11.2024, the Doctors at the Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru of the Neurology Department certifies that the husband of the petitioner is suffering from Guillain Barre Syndrome and he has to continue to be on mechanical ventilation. The certificate issued by the Doctors are appended to the petition. Between 22.02.2025 to 18.03.2025, the Doctors at the hospital have housed the husband of the petitioner in the Intensive Care Unit, as the requirement of the support of the ventilator appeared to have become permanent. With all these factors, he is now unable to write and sign.
4. The husband of the petitioner has his account in respondents No. 2 to 4 - Banks. The petitioner submitted a representation to each of the Banks quoting the account number, permitting the petitioner to operate the account, the petitioner being the wife. All certificates necessary were submitted to the Banks. The Banks have not acted and the petitioner has not been able to draw money to meet the day-to-day expenses of the treatment and the livelihood of the family. It is therefore, the petitioner is at the doors of this Court directing the petitioner to be permitted to operate the account, as the guardian of Dr. Anil Kumar H.V., her husband.
5. Shri H. Venkatesh Dodderi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the petitioner is the wife of the account holder. The account holder is still lying down in the Intensive Care Unit, now more than nine months, he is unable to write and sign any papers. He is in a comatose state and is in the Intensive Care Unit, now on ventilation, throughout. Therefore, a direction is sought to respondents No.2 to 4 - Banks to allow the petitioner to draw money for day-to-day treatment and for their livelihood.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - State would not object the same, owing to the situation in which the husband of the petitioner is.
7. Learned counsels for respondents No.2 to 4 - Banks would submit that if a direction is issued by the Court, it could be as the account has been inoperative for some time.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the available material on record.
9. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The relationship between the petitioner and the account holder - Dr. Anil Kumar H.V., is husband and wife. Just before the retirement, the husband develops Guillain Barre Syndrome, which necessitates a patient of that syndrome to be on ventilator and results in ebbing mental prowess. The patient would beco
