In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court has quashed proceedings against Dr. Pramod John, who was accused of abandoning his elderly father under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The court emphasized that the offence of abandoning a parent requires proof of ‘total neglect.’
Background of the Case
The case, registered as Crl.MC No. 1262 of 2024, revolved around an incident that occurred on November 30, 2016. Dr. Pramod John, aged 58, was accused by his sister of abandoning their father by sending him in a taxi from Ernakulam to Thiruvananthapuram without adequate care. The complaint, filed three months after the incident, alleged that Dr. John had neglected their father, who was suffering from old age diseases.
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issue was whether Dr. John’s actions constituted abandonment under Section 24 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The prosecution initially cited Section 20(3) of the Act, which does not exist. The court had to determine if the actions of Dr. John met the criteria for abandonment as defined by the law.
Court’s Decision
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas presided over the case. The court noted that the term ‘abandoning’ requires total neglect, and when prefixed by the word ‘wholly,’ it indicates absolute and complete abandonment. The court observed that arranging a taxi to transport the elderly parent to his daughter’s house did not constitute abandonment.
Key Observations:
– Definition of Abandonment: “The term ‘abandoning’ requires total neglect. The said term when prefixed by the word ‘wholly’ indicates absolute and complete abandonment… Thus unless there is a total and complete abandonment of the parent by leaving him in a place without any arrangement for taking care of the senior citizen, the offence cannot be said to have been committed.”
– Context of Transportation: “The very fact that a taxi was arranged to transport the senior citizen/parent to his daughter’s house indicates that there was no abandonment as contemplated by law.”
– Source of Complaint: The court also noted that the complaint did not originate from the elderly parent but from his daughter, which further weakened the prosecution’s case.
Also Read
Conclusion
The court concluded that the prosecution of Dr. Pramod John was an abuse of the process of the court and quashed all proceedings against him in C.C. No. 1504 of 2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-IX, Ernakulam.
Representation
Dr. Pramod John was represented by advocates K.R. Vinod, M.S. Letha, Nabil Khader, and Rahul S. The state was represented by Public Prosecutor Ashi M.C.
