Mumbai: Bombay High Court on Monday frowned at the center and stated more than the use of the term ‘mental retardation’ in law and even in official use.
“Failure, Mad Human, Backed Mental is ancient …
I will not, even if needed, look at this law.
In my court if these words are used, the cost sequence will follow,” said Justice Gautam Patel.
He heard a lawsuit by the son of a doctor (57) from byculla to appoint his legal com to manage his engaged and immovable assets, accounts and bank affairs.
The Father has been in a vegetative since June 2018 after a large-scale stroke resulting in acute brain injury due to lack of oxygen.
He was dismissed in August 2018.
The January Neurological report confirmed his condition and added he was lying in bed and despite being aware, not oriented with time, place and people.
He has severe comorbidity such as diabetes and hypertension.
He is hemodynamically stable, but he cannot do any task or make a decision.
HC: Using the term ‘retardation’ insulting to condition the Putra Pramod Tambe advocate said the lawsuit was submitted based on order 32-A (2) (guardian of someone who was defective) from the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 because there was no other provisions in law for people in such conditions.
The state advocate Jyoti Chavan said it was a “Malang case”, and JJ Hospital panel must be directed at examining patients and submitting a report.
But the judge asked if the country denied the report of a private hospital better than JJ.
But the Central Advocates of Yogeshwar Bhate said the Petitioner had to submit a request under the national trust for the welfare of people with autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation and several ACT, 1999 disabilities, and trust (committees) would decide the application.
Justice Patel questioned whether the family member of someone suffering from a stroke is expected to approach the trust in guardian appointed and why they cannot approach the court.
He said the action would not apply to clinical conditions.
That’s when he recorded the words “mental retardation” in the ACT degree.
“It has terms such as autism, cerebral palsy, some defects.
But mental retardation? Whoever has compiled this backward,” Justice Patel said.
He said ancient laws with such terms must be revoked.
“Talk to your Attorney General,” he told Bhate.
He told the state “your JJ Hospital” also uses the term ‘mental retardation’ in the certificate and asks if the government supports its use.
“It’s inability to their condition,” he said.
When Chavan said there was a need for sensitization, Judge Patel replied, “Your form says mental retardation.
What sensitization?” Noting that the two men’s sisters agreed to his appointment as a law guardian, the judge allowed the petition.