Use of term ‘mental retardation’ in statutes triggers HC’s anger

Use of term ‘mental retardation’ in statutes triggers HC’s anger

HC Frowns At Centre, State Over Using Term Even In Official Use

Rosy.Sequeira@timesgroup.com

Mumbai:24.08.2021

The Bombay high court on Monday frowned at the Centre and state over use of the term ‘mental retardation’ in statutes and even in official use.

“Lunacy, mad man, mentally retarded are antiquated... I am not going to, even if required, look at these statutes. In my court if these words are used, an order of cost will follow,” said Justice Gautam Patel.

He heard a suit by the son of a physician (57) from Byculla to appoint him his legal guardian to manage his movable and immovable assets, bank accounts and affairs. The father has been in a vegetative state since June 28, 2018, after a massive stroke that resulted in acute brain injury due to oxygen deprivation. He was discharged on August 5, 2018. The neurologist’s January 2021 report confirmed his condition and added that he is bedridden and though conscious, not oriented with time, place and person. He has severe comorbidities like diabetes and hypertension. He is hemodynamically stable, but he is not able to perform any task or take a decision.

The son’s advocate Pramod Tambe said the suit is filed under Order 32-A (2) (guardian of a person under a disability) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as there is no other provision in the law for persons in such condition. The state’s advocate Jyoti Chavan said it is an “unfortunate case,” and a panel of JJ Hospital must be directed to examine the patient and file a report. But the judge asked whether the state is disputing the report of a private hospital which is better than JJ Hospital. But the Centre’s advocate Yogeshwar Bhate said the petitioner must apply under the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999, and a trust (committee) will decide his application. Justice Patel questioned whether a family member of someone who suffers a stroke is expected to approach the trust to be appointed guardian and why they cannot approach the court. He also said the Act will not apply to a clinical condition.

It was then that he took note of the words “mental retardation” in the title of the Act. “It has terms like autism, cerebral palsy, multiple disabilities. But mental retardation? Whoever has drafted this is retarded,” said Justice Patel. He said antiquated statutes with such terms must be repealed. “Talk to your attorney general,” he told Bhate.

The Bombay HC was hearing a suit by the son of a Byculla physician, who suffered a debilitating stroke, to appoint him his legal guardian

Lunacy, mad man, mentally retarded are antiquated...Whoever has drafted this is retarded. I am not going to, even if required, look at these statutes. In my court if these words are used, an order of cost will follow

—Justice Gautam Patel