Emphasising that elderly care is a non-negotiable, the Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to examine the feasibility of evolving a comprehensive statutory framework for identifying and protecting 'Senior Citizens in Need of Care and Protection', akin to the protection available for Juveniles under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj was hearing a writ petition pertaining to the medical emergency of an elderly woman who is a widow, suffering from gangrene on her right foot, and other medical ailments.

“…While this Court is conscious that children and senior citizens constitute distinct classes requiring separate statutory treatment, the underlying constitutional principle of extending effective protection to vulnerable persons who are unable to safeguard their own interests warrants serious consideration. The concept of a 'child in need of care and protection' embodied in Section 2(14) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 demonstrates a comprehensive statutory model for identifying vulnerable persons and providing institutional care, rehabilitation and protection…”, the court underscored in its order.

The court was informed by the state earlier that the petitioner-son and the widow's daughter had been allegedly neglecting her medical requirements. Moreover, even the Hospital had discharged the widow citing that no additional treatment would improve her condition.

The court has hence directed the government to immediately admit the 4^th Respondent- Widow to a government hospital at Mysuru so that she can avail all medical treatments such as geriatric care, surgical intervention, medicines, diagnostic investigations, and rehabilitation.

“…The Medical Superintendent shall ensure that periodic updates regarding the medical condition and treatment of respondent No.4 are furnished to the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru, so as to keep him informed of her progress and any significant developments requiring his attention”, the court noted.

The court also clarified that the Hospital expenses would be completely borne by the state government.

“…There are large number of matters, which are coming up before this Court as regards the senior citizens' rights being violated….”, the court noted in the order at the outset in the July 21 order.

Comprehensive Framework For Elderly

The Court noted that Section 20 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 requires State Governments to ensure that government hospitals provide beds for senior citizens and expand facilities for treating chronic, terminal and degenerative diseases. Section 22 requires the District Magistrate to implement the Act's provisions.

However, the Court opined that the aforesaid provisions could be inadequate in addressing instances of neglect, abandonment, abuse, exploitation, lack of medical care, absence of institutional support etc.

Hence, the court directed,

“…the State Government shall therefore examine whether a corresponding framework, suitably adapted to the needs of senior citizens, can be evolved by legislative, executive or policy measures for identifying "Senior Citizen in Need of Care and Protection" and extending to them appropriate measures relating to rescue, protection, shelter, healthcare, rehabilitation….and continuous monitoring”.

The state has been asked to report on the existing statutory provisions, schemes and institutional mechanisms for senior citizens, deficiencies in the existing framework, additional measures proposed to be undertaken to bridge that gap, authorities and departments that would be responsible for the implementation of said rectifications and timelines for the same, along with whether the state would promulgate a comprehensive policy/legislation for elderly 'in need of care and protection'.

The Registrar (Judicial) has been directed by the court to forward a copy of the order to the Chairperson, Karnataka Law Commission, to take necessary action by the next date of hearing.

Detailing further about the comprehensive network to be formulated by the state for senior citizens broadly on the lines of the institutional protection available under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, the court suggested that an integrated institutional mechanism could be establishe.

The facets of this institutional response system would purportedly include identification and rescue of the elderly when immediate intervention is required and establishment of appropriate, statutory authorities, district-level committees etc for assessment of vulnerable senior citizens and planning their rehabilitation. The court has also asked the state to consider implementing a 24-hour emergency response systems, helplines, outreach services and rapid response teams, along with temporary shelter homes, assisted living facilities, care centres etc.

Other suggestions are:

• Comprehensive geriatric healthcare, nursing assistance, mental healthcare etc.
• Counselling and psychological support
• Legal aid mechanisms and case workers to supervise the care and rehabilitation of the elderly
• Coordination between various departments of the state and periodic monitoring of vulnerable senior citizens through home visits, digital case management systems, social audits etc.
• Development of community-based care models and grievance redressal mechanisms for reporting abuse, neglect and exploitation, protection of whistle-blowers etc.
• Formulation of SOPs regarding elderly and welfare schemes for the

The Court has also directed the State to consider whether a senior citizen may be regarded as being 'in need of care and protection' in a plethora of circumstances such as when found without adequate shelter or subsistence, or found abandoned or neglected by responsible persons, or when the elderly are childless with no one to rely on for protection or support.

The other circumstances listed by the court for examination include senior citizens subjected to physical, mental, emotional psychological, economic or financial abuse, neglect, exploitation etc and live in the reasonable fear of such harm. The other plausible situations for a senior citizen to need care and protection would be suffering from chronic illnesses or being disable with unfit caregivers or no caregivers at all, and deprived of basic necessities essential for living a life of dignity.

There would be other situations too, the court noted, of senior citizens financially exploited, dispossessed of their property or found wandering or under the threat of natural disaster or crimes against them. A 'catch all phrase' has also been indicated by the court suggesting that senior citizens found to be living in circumstances which endanger his or her life, liberty, health, dignity or overall well-being would fall within the aforesaid definition of being 'in need of care and protection', leaving it for the state to decide the final structure.

The matter will be heard again on August 10.

On July 21, 2026, the Court had directed the District Magistrate, Mysuru, to depute a suitable person to visit the respondent widow and ascertain her status. The Court had then observed that the respondent's medical condition was dangerous and that even the hospital had discharged her stating no further treatment would help.

For context, the writ petition was filed by the son of the respondent, challenging orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, in proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

The petitioner sought to quash the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated March 4, 2020, and amended order dated February 2, 2021, which was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner's order dated November 3, 2023.

Case Title: Praveen Kumar M v. State of Karnataka & Ors

Case No: WP 3953/2024

Click Here To Read/ Download Order