In A Landmark Verdict, Delhi HC Asks Parents To Compensate Daughter For Violating Her Right To Choice, Detaining Her In Mental Hospital [Read Judgment]

HC says obligation to respect one‘s rights is placed both on state and non-state actors.In a rather unusual judgement coming on the heels of Supreme Court’s Hadiya verdict, the Delhi High Court has recognised that threat to the right of choice of a person and thereby right to life, liberty, privacy and dignity can very well come from the person‘s own parents and has directed the parents of a girl to pay her compensation of Rs 3 lakh for forcibly picking her up from the residence of her music teachers and detaining her in a mental institution where she was forced to spend one day and one night in “clear violation of Section 19 MHA read with Article 21 of the Constitution of India”.A bench of Justices S Muralidhar and C Hari Shankar also directed the Cosmos Institute of Mental Health and Behavioural Sciences (CIMBS), the private mental health facility where the girl was detained illegally and the ambulance service named Almas Ambulance Service (Almas), which transported her to the hospital by administering her some medicine which caused her to faint, to also pay the girl a compensation of Rs 3 lakh and Rs 1 lakh respectively.The compensation is to be deposited in the girl’s own account in four weeks.The Court concluded that the act of the parents in forcibly taking away of the girl from the residence of the Petitioners (her music teacher) on 11th June 2017 and her consequent detention at the private mental hospital till the morning hours of 13th June, 2017 was illegal and unconstitutional and violative of her fundamental rights to life, liberty, dignity and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and Section 19 of the MHA.The parents have been told to not disturb her right to choice and privacy.The verdict of the court comes in a writ of habeas corpus moved by the woman’s classical music teacher who is 69 years old and her wife.Facts of the case:In the instant case, the 23-year-old girl referred to as ‘Z’ in the judgement to maintain her privacy, had been living with her classical music teacher and his wife since she turned 18. She had been taking lessons in music from them since the age of 11.It all started with a criminal complaint filed by Z’s parents in 2014 in Saket court wherein they averred that there was a history of mental illness running in the family and that their daughter‘s behaviour had undergone a drastic change since 2011. They had alleged that Z had been enticed away by the Petitioners who had undue influence over her from the time when she was a minor.The complaint was dismissed by the Magistrate on April, 2015 after she spoke with Z in chamber where she spoke about being harassed by her parents previously and how she had approached National Commission for Women for redress. Z informed the magistrate that she was a major; had never suffered from any mental ailment; had no intention of joining her parents and wanted to live separately.The parents initiated second round of litigation in 2016 when they approached the Delhi High court pleading that they be appointed as guardians of Z.The writ petition was heard by a learned Single Judge and during the pendency of the petition, on the orders of the court, Z underwent a psychiatric evaluation at AIIMS over the course of 6-7 sessions. The doctors concluded there was no indication towards psychosis (schizophrenia) or any other psychopathology.In the light of this report, the single judge dismissed the petition as withdrawn.Z gets picked up by her parents Less than a year after the single judge’s order, on 11th June 2017, a letter was addressed by Z‘s parents to the SHO of Police Station Malviya Nagar where they complained of their daughter having been enticed away by her music teacher.In this letter, the parents neither mentioned that the girl was major nor did they reveal about their unsuccessful complaint before the magistrate. Rather, a bald assertion was made to the effect that doctor has advised for immediate medical attention and psychiatric treatment of Z.At about 5 PM the same day, the parents and brother of Z accompanied by local police from Malviya Nagar police station and the officials of Almas forcibly barged into the Petitioners‘ (music teacher) house. The teacher was allegedly beaten up while Z was forcibly administered intravenous substance which caused her to faint.Z's father went on to state on affidavit that he decided on the said course of action on the advice of Dr Sunil Mittal, the officer-in-charge of CIMBS. The court also noted that, “Z‘s father goes on to state in his affidavit that CIMBS maintains an operational connection with an ambulance service provider, i.e. Almas whose contact details were provided to him by CIMBS authorities”.Z was taken away to CIMBS and kept there without her consent till the morning of 13th June 2017 without the medical officer-in-charge Dr Sunil Mittal satisfying himself about the need for Z to be admitted as an in-patient as mandated by Section 19 of the Mental Health Act.CIMBS ...

In A Landmark Verdict, Delhi HC Asks Parents To Compensate Daughter For Violating Her Right To Choice, Detaining Her In Mental Hospital [Read Judgment]

akanksha jain

Tags