Deceased's prior written consent under Kerala Anatomy Act S.4A(1) for body donation prevails over objecting heirs' claims.

JUDGMENT

Petitioners seek release of the body of their mother, which was apparently handed over by some of the legal heirs to the Medical College Hospital, for anatomical and other educational purposes.

2. Petitioners' mother Smt. Mary, wife of the late Sri. John, died on

23.02.2026. Petitioners allege that respondents 5 to 7, who are also some of the other legal heirs of the deceased, donated the body of their mother to the Government Medical College Hospital, Kalmassery, for medical purposes without their consent. Acting upon the objection of the petitioners, it is alleged that the Medical College Hospital received the body and shifted it to the mortuary, where it is kept for the last two months. According to the petitioners, immediately upon becoming aware about the manner in which the body of their mother was handled, they submitted a complaint to the Narakkal Police Station and also submitted a representation to the Hospital for releasing the body. Despite such petitions, including a complaint to the State Police Chief, the body has not been released and instead, the same is kept in the mortuary. Petitioners assert that they are willing to accept the body and conduct the last rites of their mother. As the body has not been released, they have approached this Court seeking directions, inter alia, to release the body and to render all assistance apart from initiating an investigation into the death of the deceased.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 5 to 7 pointing out that the deceased had seven children including the petitioners apart from the eighth respondent and that the eldest daughter of the deceased has not been arrayed as a party in the writ petition, though her husband has been arrayed. According to respondents 5 to 7, the deceased and her husband were looked after by the eldest daughter, who was residing in a house adjacent to that of the residence of the deceased and further that even though the sons of the deceased were given their due share by their father, they used to harass and assault their parents demanding further share in the residential property. Respondents 5 to 7 also alleged that second petitioner and eighth respondent and their spouses had attacked the parents and that a criminal case was even filed, which, though ended in acquittal, distanced their parents from the second petitioner and the eighth respondent, leading to the eldest daughter Elizabeth taking care of the parents. It is also averred that when the father died on 10.01.2019, petitioners and the eighth respondent, created a ruckus resulting in delaying the funeral. It is averred that these incidents were shocking to the deceased mother who thereafter expressed her desire to offer her body, after her death, to the Medical College.

4. The counter affidavit further averred that in furtherance of her desire, she asked the fifth respondent to contact the Medical College to understand the procedure and thus, as per the procedure suggested by the hospital authorities, the deceased mother executed Ext.R5(a) consent deed on a stamp paper, in favour of the Principal of the College, agreeing to handover her body after her death to the Government Medical College for the purpose of conducting anatomical examination and dissection. The respondents 5 to 7 further alleged that the deceased was under treatment at the Aster Medcity and in November 2025 she had a fall causing injuries to her and the expenses for the treatment were totally borne by the eldest daughter Elizabeth. Again the deceased was hospitalized on 19.02.2026 at Aster Medcity