SHOBHA GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an "SOS call" (Save Our Souls call) from two sinking families of the dear ones of a person lying in 'comatose state', finding it extremely difficult to see the ways and means in procuring funds to provide adequate treatment and life support to the victim, who was the sole bread winner of the family, besides the need for their daily sustenance.

(2.) The victim, lying in a comatose state, is having some properties [immovable/movable] and small bank deposits, but the petitioners are not in a position to deal with the same because of the 'legal hurdles'. They have already incurred huge expenses, as borrowed from different corners, in connection with the treatment. Having exhausted all their financial resources, they are in a state of despair, isolation and abandonment; besides undergoing unending agony, stress and depression on account of the plight of their dear one lying in a 'permanent vegetative stat e' and 'coma'. The petitioners are constrained to approach this court for appointing the named petitioner/wife of the patient in comatose state as 'Guardian', contending that no legislation in India does provide for appointment of Guardian for a person in comatose state, unlike legislations for appointment of 'Guardian for minors' and persons with other disabilities like mental retardation etc.

(3.) The petitioners in W.P(C)No.37278 of 2018 are the wife and son of Shri T. Gopalakrishnan, who suffered an irreversible brain damage on account of cardiac arrest and was lying in a comatose state from 28.04.2018- the ill fated day on which celebration/reception in connection with the marriage of the second petitioner/son was going on. The victim was immediately taken to the Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam, where he was treated for more than one month and was discharged, as the treatment did not show any signs of meaningful neurological recovery. As per Ext.P1 Discharge Certificate dated 01.06.2018, it was certified that, though the patient was hemodynamically stable (with enough pressure in the circulatory system to keep the blood flowing), since he was remaining in 'comatose state', prolonged multidisciplinary hospice care at home was necessary. Thereafter, the patient was admitted in P.S. Mission Hospital, Maradu, which is near to the place of residence of the petitioners. The condition of the patient, at the time of admission on 02.06.2018 and at the time of discharge on 05.10.2018 (after four months' treatment)was in 'comatose state'. As per Ext.P2 discharge certificate issued from P.S.Mission Hospital, it was observed that continued supportive treatments had to be followed up all during his life time. The case of the petitioners is that the patient was the sole bread winner of the family, engaged in his own business; the petitioners have so far spent more than Rs.20 lakhs towards medical expenses and upkeep of the patient; that the said amount was mobilised with much difficulty on the help of relatives and friends; that both the petitioners are unemployed and are running out of financial resources even to meet their basic needs, but for the minimal rentals they receive. It was in the said circumstance, they seek to appoint the first petitioner as the 'Guardian' of her husband (victim/patient) and also for operating his bank accounts and to deal with his properties on war footing; pointing out that there is no legislation for appointment of a 'Guardian' in respect of persons lying in 'comatose state' and hence immediate interference is necessary.