The court recognized the need for guardianship for incapacitated adults under the parens patriae jurisdiction, providing specific directions for urgent medical care access and property management.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2026 The writ petition is filed by the wife and children of Mr. Mohan Kumar, aged 73 years, who has been diagnosed with Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD), a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that has resulted in complete cognitive and functional incapacity. He is unable to recognise persons, perform daily activities, or manage his financial and legal affairs, contend the petitioners.

2. The 1^st petitioner, being his wife and primary caregiver, has been providing full-time care with the assistance of a home nurse and physiotherapist. The recurring monthly expenditure for medical treatment, personal care, and household maintenance amounts to approximately ₹1,30,500/-, apart from incidental medical expenses. The income presently available to the 1^st petitioner and the other petitioners is wholly inadequate to meet the recurring medical care giving and household expenses of Mr. Mohan Kumar and the family. Mr. Mohan Kumar has substantial funds in his Bank accounts and owns immovable properties in Thiruvananthapuram and Alappuzha Districts.

3. However, due to his mental incapacity, he is unable to operate his Bank accounts or deal with his assets. The petitioners have therefore, approached this Court seeking appointment of the 1^st petitioner as the guardian of Mr. Mohan Kumar to enable her to utilise his funds and property exclusively for his treatment and welfare.

4. There exists no statutory mechanism under Indian law to appoint a guardian for an adult person rendered incapacitated by dementia or similar disorders.

Hence, this writ petition is filed invoking the parens patriae jurisdiction of this Cout under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, relying upon the law laid down in Shobha Gopalakrishnan and others [2019 (2) KHC 488].

5. In the afore facts and circumstances of the case, the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned in Alappuzha is suo motu impleaded as the additional 13^th respondent in the writ petition.

The writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioners make a joint application under Section 14 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act before the additional 13^th respondent, taking into consideration the fact that there are no serious disputes involved in the case among the legal heirs and taking into consideration the urgency involved in the matter, the additional 13^th respondent shall pass orders as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month positively from the date of receipt of the application. In the meanwhile, the 7^th respondent shall permit the 1^st petitioner to withdraw an amount of ₹2 lakhs from the account of Mr.Mohan Kumar bearing Account No.920010042496775, taking into consideration the medical requirement indicated by the petitioners.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 41644 OF 2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCTOR’S NOTE ISSUED BY DR. VYSAKHA K V, G G HOSPITAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 28.03.2025 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE EEG REPORT DATED