ORDER

The instant case involves a desperate family, who are short of financial means and are seeking for appointment of a guardian in respect of the assets for a coma patient, who requires constant medical treatment which involves huge costs.

2. (i) The petitioners are the wife and children of a coma patient, named, J.P.Acharya, who is an Entrepreneur. According to the petitioners, on the fateful day i.e., on 26.02.2021, the first petitioner husband viz., J.P. Acharya suffered severe head-ache and immediately, he was rushed to the hospital and it was found that he suffered an aneurysm due to the rupture of the blood vessels in the brain coupled with intercranial hemorrhage and due to which, he suffered heavy bleeding in his brain. Thereafter, a surgery has been done to stop the bleeding and he was moved to Intensive Care Unit (ICU). According to the petitioners, J.P.Acharya is now lying in a comatose condition. According to the petitioners, till the date of hospitalisation of J.P.Acharya i.e., on 26.02.2021, J.P.Acharya was actively running his business and personally handling his finances. It is the case of the petitioners that J.P.Acharya, the coma patient owns several properties and bank accounts with sufficient funds for his medical expenses and to meet his business commitments. However, according to the petitioners, the Banks, in which, J.P. Acharya is having bank accounts, are refusing to allow the petitioners to operate his accounts on his behalf to clear the mounting hospital bills and for his business commitments.

(ii) According to the petitioners, there is no provision under any Legislation for appointment of a guardian for a person in Coma. Hence, according to them, they have no other alternative except to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for an extraordinary relief to declare the first petitioner, who is the wife of J.P.Acharya, as his guardian. It is also stated in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition that the 1st petitioner, who is the wife of J.P.Acharya is the nominee in all his bank accounts and investments and, hence, the petitioners unanimously wish to appoint the first petitioner as the guardian for J.P.Acharya.

(iii) In the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, the petitioners have also referred to various Legislations including (1) Mental Health Act, 1987, Mental Health Care Act, 2017, Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Field Participation) Act, 1995, National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 and would submit that none of the statutes enables any person to be appointed as a guardian in respect of the properties belonging to a coma patient. In such circumstances, this Writ Petition has been filed for a declaration to declare the first petitioner as a guardian of the movables and immovables assets and estate of J.P.Acharya, the Coma patient, who is presently in a vegetative state of mind.

3. Heard Ms.L.Maithili, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of this Court to various judgments passed by different High Courts in identical matters. She first drew the attention of this Court to a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Vandana Tyagi & Anr. -vs- Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Others, reported in 2020 SCC Online Del 32 and in particular, she referred to paragraph 61, which reads as follows:-

"61. Insofar as the RPWD Act is concerned, it was enacted with the view to give effect to the United Nations Conventions on the rights of persons with disabilities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The United Nations General Assembly adopted the aforementioned convention on 13.12.2006. India is a signatory to this convention which was rati