Doctrine of Parens Patriae

Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News?

Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Prashant Kumar made the wife the guardian of her husband who is in permanently vegetative state by applying the Doctrine of Parens Patriae.

• The Allahabad High Court gave this observation in the case of Pooja Sharma v. State of UP And 2 Others.

What is the Background of Pooja Sharma v. State of UP And 2 Others Case?

• The petitioner wife pleaded before the Allahabad HC to appoint her as the guardian of her husband who is in permanent vegetative state.
• She contended that by this she would be able to dispose of the property of her husband to meet the ends of their livelihood.
• The petitioner contended that in India there is no legislation, which provides for appointment of Guardian for a person in comatose state, like it has procedure of appointment of ‘Guardian for minors’ and persons with other disabilities like mental retardation, etc.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Allahabad HC observed that “If the Court is satisfied that the person concerned is in a vegetative state, then surely ‘Parens Patriae’ jurisdiction can be exercised”.

What is the Doctrine of Parens Patriae?

• About:
  • The Doctrine of Parens Patriae, means "parent of the nation," is a legal principle that grants the state the inherent power and authority to act as the guardian for those who are unable to care for themselves.
  • In India, this doctrine reflects the nation's commitment to protect the welfare and interests of its citizens.
• History:
  • The roots of the Doctrine of Parens Patriae can be traced back to English common law.
  • Historically, the King acted as the ultimate guardian of his subjects, especially in cases involving individuals who were unable to represent their own interests.

What are the Major Areas of Law on Which Doctrine of Parens Patriae is Applicable in India?

• Juvenile Justice:
  • Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, state's commits to act as the guardian for juvenile offenders.
  • It focusses on rehabilitation and the best interests of the juvenile, aligning with the principles of Parens Patriae.
• Consumer Protection:
  • In consumer protection cases, the state often exercises its Parens Patriae powers to safeguard the interests of consumers.
  • The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, empowers the state to intervene in matters where consumers are exploited, and it provides mechanisms for compensation and redressal.
• Environmental Issues:
  • The state acts as the guardian of the environment, intervening in cases where activities pose a threat to ecological balance and public health.
• Persons with Disabilities:
  • The state applies this doctrine to make decisions on behalf of people who are incapable of making their own decisions due to certain disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
• Victims of Mental Health:
  • The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, incorporates the principles of Parens Patriae in the context of mental health.
  • The state is empowered to protect and promote the rights of persons with mental illness, ensuring their access to treatment and care.

What are Landmark Cases Referred in this Case?

• E. (Mrs.) v. Eve (1986):
  • Supreme Court of Canada observed that the doctrine must at all times be exercised with great caution, a caution that must increase with the seriousness of the matter.
    • This is particularly so in cases where a court might be tempted to act because failure to act would risk imposing an obviously heavy burden on another person.
• Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K. M. & Ors (2018):
  • The SC in this case observed that the doctrine can be applied on following situations.
    • Where a person is mentally ill and is produced before the court in a writ of habeas corpus, the court may invoke the aforesaid doctrine.
    • On certain other occasions, when a girl who is not a major has eloped with a person and she is produced at the behest of habeas corpus filed by her parents and she expresses fear of life in the custody of her parents, the court may exercise the jurisdiction to send her to an appropriate home meant to give shelter to women where her interest can be best taken care of till she becomes a major.
• Uma Mittal v. Union of India (2018):
  • The Allahabad HC, by applying this doctrine, made the wife the guardian of her husband.