In an extraordinary display of judicial compassion, Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court, accompanied by his wife Kamakshi, personally visited the residence of an 83-year-old bedridden man in Chennai to assess his mental health, following claims made in a court petition by the man’s elder son.
The judge took this step after considering that the elderly man, P.K.M. Durai, who suffered a stroke in 2021, had lost his ability to speak and was being fed through a tube, would face severe discomfort if brought to court.
Justice Swaminathan was hearing a petition filed by Sivakumar Chellathurai under Clause 17 of the Letters Patent, which empowers the High Court to act as a guardian in matters concerning “minors, lunatics and idiots”—terms the judge noted remain in statute despite being outdated and inappropriate. The petitioner sought to be appointed as the manager of his father’s properties and to be allowed to dispose of them. He also alleged that Mr. Durai was mentally unsound and requested the court to direct his mother and younger brother to take their father to the hospital.
To verify the claim, the judge and his wife Kamakshi, a special educator familiar with mental health issues, visited Mr. Durai’s home in Kodambakkam. During the visit, Kamakshi conducted a basic cognitive test by writing “hospital” and “home” on paper and asking Mr. Durai to indicate his choice. Though he initially touched “hospital,” likely due to motor coordination difficulties, he began to cry when asked if he wished to be shifted there. A repeat of the test resulted in him clearly selecting “home” and using gestures to indicate his comfort in the home environment.
Describing the visit, Justice Swaminathan wrote, “Due to his physical condition, he was drooling. Whenever he drooled, he took his handkerchief with the help of his left hand and wiped the saliva. Whenever he cried, he also used handkerchief to wipe his tears. From all this, I could come to a clear and categorical conclusion that Thiru. P.K.M. Durai was suffering only from serious physical debilities. But his mental condition was rather good.”
The judge concluded that the petitioner’s claim of mental illness was unsubstantiated and emphasized that Mr. Durai’s best interest lay in remaining at home, surrounded by his immediate family and grandchildren. “If he is shifted to hospital, he would definitely suffer from loneliness. He may be confined in ICU… The interests of Thiru. P.K.M. Durai are paramount,” he observed.
Although Justice Swaminathan found the main petition to be without merit, he refrained from dismissing it immediately, noting that the senior counsel engaged by the petitioner was not present during the hearing.
