Vinod Kumar Poddar & Anr. v. Local Level Committee through DC South Delhi & Ors.

8. Learned Court Commissioner in her proposal for guardianship dated 22.02.2025 recommended that guardianship of Mr. Rohan Podar should be entrusted with either Ananda by Action for Autism or Shaurya Foundation, organisations registered under Section 12 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999. The petitioners were amenable with the aforesaid proposal submitted by the learned Court Commissioner.

9. However, the respondent no.4 was not amenable with the proposal submitted by the learned Court Commissioner and had opposed shifting of Mr. Rohan Podar from his current residence to an institution. Respondent no.4 in her affidavit-cum-proposal for guardianship dated 07.03.2025 instead suggested as under:

10. On 11.03.2025, Ms. Merry Barua, founder of ‘Ananda by Action for Autism’ appeared before this Court and suggested that as a preliminary exercise, representatives of Ananda by Action for Autism be allowed to visit Mr. Rohan Podar at his residence for an initial assessment in order to evaluate and propose a suitable transitional plan for him. Since the said submission was not opposed by either of the parties, on 11.03.2025 following directions came to be passed by this Court:

e) Learned Court Commissioner is requested to coordinate with Ananda by Action for Autism and Ms. Merry Barua and file the initial assessment report before the next date of hearing.”

11. In compliance of the aforesaid order, Functional Skill Assessment report and transition plan for shifting Mr. Rohan Podar from his current residence i.e., B-5/119, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi to Ananda by Action for Autism, prepared by the representatives of Ananda by Action for Autism has been filed by the learned Court Commissioner. Based on the Functional Assessment Report, the transition plan suggested by the Ananda by Action for Autism is as under: Steps Action Timeline

1. Pairing with Rohan Team members from AFA will visit Rohan at his home and interact with him, and build up a rapport and trust with Rohan 3-4 days approx

2. Introduce visual/story about short visits to Ananda AFA team members visit Rohan at his house and introduce him to visual and social story to prepare him for visiting Ananda Approx 3-4 days before visiting Ananda

3. (a) Familiarization Visits to Ananda Assisted Living (b) Introduce visual / social story about move to Ananda along with final date of Rohan shifting to his new home Rohan visits Ananda for 2-3 hours on different days at different times to familiarize himself with the place and the people living there. AFA team members introduce story to Rohan when he visits Ananda, to give him information about the shift to a new house and new family 3-4 Visits approx

4. Set up room for Rohan in Ananda AFA team sets up Rohan’s room at Ananda with his own furniture, linen etc that he is familiar with The same day We suggest residents bring in familiar furniture and other items to make their new home feel familiar and help them in the settling down. The logistics will have to be planned tightly transitions to Ananda.

5. Settling down in Ananda Rohan stays the night and settles down in a few days 15-20 days approx. Due to the apprehensions expressed by the parties about Rohan’s long association with his current primary caregiver, Mr. Balram, AFA is willing to offer residential employment to Mr. Balram at the Assisted Living facility subject to Mr. Balram’s interview which will be conducted during the above process, and subject to his willingness to work for the institution and care for other residents, as is the practice, on a rotational basis. Mr. Balram, if selected, will also have to be involved in the diverse tasks to be undertaken as a staff member.”

12. At the outset, it is noticed that although the present petition was filed by the petitioner for being appointed as the guardian of Mr. Rohan Podar, however, pursuant to the proposal submitted by the learned Court Commissioner vide an affidavit dated 28.02.2025, the petitioners have submitted that they are amenable to the proposal of appointing Ananda by Action for Autism as the guardian for Mr. Rohan Podar.

13. It is also noticed that initially the respondent no.4 in her affidavitcum-proposal for guardianship dated 07.03.2025, opposed shifting of Mr. Rohan Podar to Ananda by Action for Autism from his present residence/living arrangement. However, brief submissions dated 10.04.2025 filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 to 5 contains a revised proposal for the guardianship of Mr. Rohan Podar. In terms of the aforesaid submissions, respondent nos. 3 to 5 submitted that they are also amenable to Mr. Rohan Podar being shifted to Ananda by Action for Autism. The said proposal reads as under: “18.The respondents state that the respondent No. 3,[4] and 5 have the following Revised proposal, which may be considered by this Hon’ble court which is as under:a. That the proper evaluation of the living conditions of Mr. Rohan Podar may be conducted, b.That along with Mr. Hanuman Rawat another guardian may be appointed by this Hon’ble High Court, which may be a Banking Institution or such other competent Institution appointed by the Local level committee or a suitable person from Ananda by action for autism, for managing the Estate of Mr. Rohan Podar by including the Respondent No. 3 and 4 in the Management of the Estate of Mr. Rohan Podar to serve the interest of justice. while in-situ arrangement by the representatives of the Ananda by action for autism and subsequently Mr. Rohan Podar may be shifted along with Mr. Balram and another caregiver at Ananda for day care basis for few days and later on Mr. Roham Podar may be shifted to Ananda by action for autism, being a registered organization with the local level committee. The entire transitional phase of 2-3 weeks may be considered for familiarization ofMr. Rohan Podar with the new accommodation and locality. c. That the entire moveable and immoveable assets of the Late Sunil Podar be divided into 50% each including the amounts as that are available under WILL dated 13/10/2023, executed in USA in favour of the Respondent No. 3 and be distributed between both the legal heirs equally by making a suitable arrangement, d. That this Hon’ble High court may be pleased to grant permission to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 for shifting Mr. Rohan Padar to USA by way of an alternate arrangement by following the due process of law, since a Rohan Podar is USA citizen. It is further submitted till such time R. Rohan Podar is Shifted to USA, the said Mr. Rohan Podar may be kept in Ananada by action forAutism. The Respondent No. 2 to 5may be allowed to have access with Mr. Rohan Podar from time to time and the limited caregivers may be permitted to reside with Mr. Rohan Podar in the said Ananada institution, in the interest and welfare of Mr. Rohan Podar, being a 90% disabled person. e. That the Respondent No. 3 and 4 be also appointed as trustees of the trust as that may be formed for the Estate of Mr. Rohan Podar and be permitted to monitor the income and expenses relating to said Mr. Rohan Podar to serve the interest of justice. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is hereby submitted that the above points may be considered by this Hon’ble High Court for passing the appropriates orders in above matter, to serve the interest of justice.”

14. In fact, in the written submission dated 20.04.2025, the said respondents have again conceded to the proposal of shifting Mr. Rohan Podar to Ananda by Action for Autism. The same reads as under: “s. That the Respondent no 3 and 4 have consented for shifting of Mr Rohan Podar and hereby Submit that the process of mediation of division of the assets of late Sunil Podar may kindly be processed simultaneously, since the Respondent no 3 is a student and she also needs the monthly expenses for her higher education in highly expensive place like, New York in U S A. That both the transit process for Mr. Rohan Podar shifting and mediation process for division of assets may be taken up simultaneously, so as to provide justice to both the surviving members of Late Sunil Podar”

15. The learned Court Commissioner in her proposal for guardianship dated22.02.2025 has brought out that the Ananda by Action for Autism is a premiere non-profit institution which has been providing support and services to persons with autisms and their families since 1991. It is a fully residential facility located at Garat Pur Bas, Haryana with a security guard, CCTVs installed in all common areas, on-site medical facility and a hospital which is just 20-25 minutes away. The institution is only about 40 kms away from current residence of Mr. Rohan Podar. The aforesaid description has been set out in detail by the learned Court Commissioner in her proposal for guardianship as under: Number of Current 13 residents with full-time residential staff to take care of the residents. Residents Daily Routine The routine of the residents is structured and they spend 4 hours every day at a workplace within the facility learning data entry, arts/crafts and other skills. Availability of Medical Care The nearest Hospital is 20-25 minutes, and two doctors are available on call. The facility also has a nurse during the daytime. They also organize medical checkup twice in the week for the residents. Security The campus has a security guard and has CCTVs in all the common areas. Initial Assessment The individuals need to visit the facility 2-3 times for 3 hours per visit, after which the facility will issue a detailed report and will share the plan for shifting the individual. No overnight stay is required for the assessment. Fees Registration: Rs. 3000/- Functional Skills Assessment: Rs. 7000/- Refundable security deposit refunded after deductions of any incidental charges during the stay: Rs. 3 lakhs Refundable Medical deposit refunded after one year if not used for any medical emergency: Rs. 2 lakhs Per month towards operational expenses taken six months upfront: Rs. 3,60,000/- Holidays Residents can remain in the facility through the year if they wish, as it aims to create a home for the residents. Relatives’ permission/intimation.

16. Moreover, pursuant to the initial assessment report/functional skill assessment, a detailed transition plan (as noticed above) has been charted out by the said institution for smooth shifting/transition of Mr. Rohan Podar from his current residence to the institution. A perusal of the said transition plan also brings out that the said institution is willing to offer Mr. Balram i.e., one of the primary caregivers of Mr. Rohan Podar, an opportunity to work as an employee of the institution subject to an assessment and provided that the caretaker agrees to be employed as a full-time employee of the residential facility and not as an exclusive caretaker of Mr. Rohan Podar.

17. Thus, the apprehension/terms stated by the respondent nos.[3] to[5] in their aforestated brief submissions for shifting Mr. Rohan Podar from his residence to institution stand addressed and satisfied.

18. In the aforesaid conspectus, it is evident that the parties to the present petition are ad idem that Mr. Rohan Podar may be shifted under the institutional care of Ananda by Action for Autism situated at Garat Pur Bas, Haryana.

19. In the written submissions filed on behalf of respondent no(s). 3 to 5 on 20.04.2025, certain reckless and unwarranted allegations/insinuations have been made by the respondents against the learned Court Commissioner. This Court strongly deprecates the same and cautions the said respondents indulging in such conduct. This Court acknowledges the diligence and sincerity of the Court Commissioner in performing the task entrusted to her and the constructive steps taken to ensure the well being of Mr. Rohan Podar.

20. It is evident that the primary grouse of the respondent no(s). 3 to 5 is as regards handling/division of financial assets of Late Mr. Sunil Podar. At present, this Court is not determining the aspect pertaining to distribution/administration of the assets; the same shall be considered at the appropriate stage after hearing the parties concerned and taking all aspects into consideration.

21. A perusal of the transition plan laid down by the Ananda by Action for Autism would reveal that it is in consonance with the medical report submitted by the medical board of RML Hospital. The transition plan clearly considers and is emphatic on the aspect that it would be detrimental to shift Mr. Rohan Podar overnight and a smooth transition, spanning over weeks in order familiarize Mr. Rohan Poddar with new environment is necessary for his comfort and welfare. Furthermore, in the transition plan, categorically Ananda by Action for Autism has agreed to provide employment to one of the primary caregivers of Mr. Rohan Podar. The welfare of Mr. Rohan Podar at each and every stage is being been kept as the utmost and primary aim of the transition plan.

22. Furthermore, the contention of the respondent nos. 3 to 5 (in its written submissions dated 20.04.2025) that additional charges have been disclosed by the learned Court Commissioner in written submission dated 17.04.2025 at the eleventh hour are also misplaced inasmuch as the charges which are laid out by the learned Court Commissioner in written submissions dated 17.04.2025 were already on record and disclosed in the recommendations of the Court Commissioner for guardianship of Mr. Rohan Podar dated 22.02.2025.

23. It is a settled position of law that Regulation 11 of the Board of Trust Regulations, 2001[2] empowers a registered organisation to be appointed as a guardian for a specially-abled adult. Furthermore, Ananda by Action for Autism meets the requirements as set out in Rule 17(iii)(iv) of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Rules, 2000[3]

11. Who may apply for guardianship. — (4) In the event of non-application of sub-regulation (1), (2) and (3), any registered organization may make an application for guardianship. for appointing an

17. Procedure for removal of Guardian. — (1) ….

(iii) While taking a decision on the appointment of guardian, the local level committee shall ensure that the person whose name has been suggested for appointment as guardian is: iv) In case of an institution or organisation being considered by the local level committee for appointment as a guardian, the following guidelines shall be followed: (a)the institution should be recognised by the State or the Central Government; (b)the institution should have a minimum of 2 years' experience in offering disability institution as legal guardian for a specially-abled adult.

24. The Supreme Court in Shafin Jahan vs Ashokan K.M. and others, (2018) 16 SCC 368 at length discussed the parens partiae jurisdiction of a Constitutional Court and observed as under:

31. Another aspect which calls for invalidating the order of the High Court is the situation in which it has invoked the parens patriae doctrine. Parens patriae in Latin means “parent of the nation”. In law, it refers to the power of the State to intervene against an abusive or negligent parent, legal guardian or informal caretaker, and to act as the parent of any child or individual who is in need of protection. “The parens patriae jurisdiction is sometimes spoken of as ‘supervisory’” [ P.W. Yong, C. Croft and M.L. Smit, On Equity.].

32. The doctrine of parens patriae has its origin in the United Kingdom in the 13th century. It implies that the King as the guardian of the nation is under obligation to look after the interest of those who are unable to look after themselves. Lindley, L.J. in Thomasset v. Thomasset [Thomasset v. Thomasset, 1894 P 295 (CA)] pointed out (p. 299) that in the exercise of the parens patriae jurisdiction, “the rights of fathers and legal guardians were always respected, but controlled to an extent unknown at common law by considering the real welfare”. The duty of the King in feudal times to act as parens patriae has been taken over in modern times by the State.

33. Black's Law Dictionary defines “parens patriae” as: “1. The State regarded as a sovereign; the State in its capacity as provider of protection to those unable to care for themselves.

2. A doctrine by which a Government has standing to prosecute a lawsuit on behalf of a citizen, especially on behalf of someone who is under a legal disability to prosecute the suit. The State ordinarily has no standing to sue on behalf of its citizens, unless a separate, sovereign interest will be served by the suit.” rehabilitationservices including running residential facilities or hostel to the respective c' category of persons with disability;

(c) the residential facility or hostel for persons with disabilities shall maintain minimum standards in terms of space, staff, furniture, rehabilitation and medical facilities as specified by the Board.

34. In Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India [Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India, (1990) 1 SCC 613], the Constitution Bench, while delving upon the concept of parens patriae, stated: (SCC p. 648, para 35)

xxx

38. In Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v. Union of India [Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454: (2011) 2 SCC (Civ) 280: (2011) 2 SCC (Cri) 294], the Court, after dealing with the decision in State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas [State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, (1976) 2 SCC 310: 1976 SCC (L&S) 227] wherein it has been stated by Mathew, J. that “the Court also is “State” within the meaning of Article 12 (of the Constitution) …”, opined: (Aruna Shanbaug case [Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454: (2011) 2 SCC (Civ) 280: (2011) 2 SCC (Cri) 294], SCC p. 521, para 130)

friend and doctors must be given due weight.”

39. Constitutional courts in this country exercise parens patriae jurisdiction in matters of child custody treating the welfare of the child as the paramount concern. There are situations when the court can invoke the parens patriae principle and the same is required to be invoked only in exceptional situations

40. In Heller v. Doe [Heller v. Doe, 1993 SCC OnLine US SC 97: 125 L Ed 2d 257: 509 US 312 (1993)], Kennedy, J., speaking for the US Supreme Court, observed: (SCC OnLine US SC). We may like to give some examples. For example, 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. “… ‘the State has a legitimate interest under its parens patriae powers in providing care to its citizens who are unable … to care for themselves’.…

41. The Supreme Court of Canada in E. v. Eve [E. v. Eve, 1986 SCC OnLine Can SC 58: (1986) 2 SCR 388] observed thus with regard to the doctrine of parens patriae: (SCC OnLine Can SC paras 75-77) The parens patriae jurisdiction for the care of the mentally incompetent is vested in the provincial superior courts. Its exercise is founded on necessity. The need to act for the protection of those who cannot care for themselves. The jurisdiction is broad. Its scope cannot be defined. It applies to many and varied situations, and a court can act not only if injury has occurred but also if it is apprehended. The jurisdiction is carefully guarded and the courts will not assume that it has been removed by legislation. While the scope of the parens patriae jurisdiction is unlimited, the jurisdiction must nonetheless be exercised in accordance with its underlying principle. The discretion given under this jurisdiction is to be exercised for the benefit of the person in need of protection and not for the benefit of others. It 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.

42. The High Court of Australia in Deptt. of Health and Community Services v. JWB and SMB [Deptt. of Health and Community Services v. JWB and SMB, 1992 HCA 15: (1992) 175 CLR 218], speaking through Mason, C.J., Dawson, Toohey and Gaudron JJ., has made the following observations with regard to the doctrine:

43. Deane, J. in the same case stated the following:

44. Recently, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, in AC v. OC [AC v. OC, 2014 NSWSC 53], has observed:

45.

25. Further, the Supreme Court in Sharmila Velamur vs V. Sanjay and Ors., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 482 had observed as under: Thus, the constitutional courts may also act as parens patriae so as to meet the ends of justice. But the said exercise of power is not without limitation. The courts cannot in every and any case invoke the parens patriae doctrine. The said doctrine has to be invoked only in exceptional cases where the parties before it are either mentally incompetent or have not come of age and it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the said parties have either no parent/legal guardian or have an abusive or negligent parent/legal guardian.

constitute equal if not more important factors than the others.

26. Furthermore, a coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) 1271/2020 while appointing a guardian committee (comprising of family members/relatives) for an adult suffering from Fronto- temporal Dementia opined that a Constitutional Court has the power to adjudicate a petition filed before it for appointment of a guardian. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:

27. The circumstances that prevail in the present petition undisputedly are peculiar in nature and call for this Court’s interference for welfare of a specially-abled adult who has been residing in India for more than 16 years, and after demise of his father/natural guardian is left to reside under the supervision of paid full-time caregivers/staff.

28. In the aforesaid conspectus, this Court is required to exercise parens partiae jurisdiction.

29. Considering the circumstances, this Court exercising parens partiae jurisdiction finds it apposite to appoint Ananda by Action for Autism as legal guardian for Mr. Rohan Podar.

30. Accordingly, the following directions are issued: a) Ananda by Action for Autism is appointed as the legal guardian of Mr. Rohan Podar from the date of passing of this order i.e., 28.05.2025. The said institution shall primarily have the right to take decisions on the following matter/s pertaining to Mr. Rohan Podar: i. Upkeep and care; ii. Residential arrangements, including recreational travel and activities; iii. Medical treatments in consultation with doctors. If need arises, the parties through the learned Court Commissioner are at the liberty to share their opinion/inputs pertaining to the treatment undertaken and doctors consulted. However, the same shall not be construed as conferring any right on the parties to interfere in decisions taken by the institution in the best interest of Mr. Rohan Podar. b) Mr. Rohan Podar shall be shifted from his current residence i.e., B- 5/119, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi to Ananda by Action for Autism situated at Garat Pur Bas, Haryana in accordance with the transition plan dated 18.03.2025 submitted by the learned Court Commissioner on behalf of the Ananda by Action for Autism. In this regard, for a smooth execution of the said shifting an updated schedule/plan with tentative dates shall be prepared by the learned Court Commissioner and Ananda by Action for Autism in consultation with the petitioners as well as respondent nos. 3 and 4 within one week from today. The petitioners and respondent nos.[3] and 4 are directed to cooperate in the aforesaid exercise and not impede or hamper the same. c) In case, at any given point of time, the transition plan proves to be unsuccessful, the institution shall immediately inform this Court along with a detailed report pertaining to the same. The interest and comfort of Mr. Rohan Podar shall be the utmost priority of all the stakeholders and parties involved in the transition plan. d) Ananda by Action for Autism is directed to schedule an interview with Mr. Balram (primary caregiver of Mr. Rohan Podar) preferably with a week from today. The said meeting shall be held in the presence of the learned Court Commissioner. In case the institution finds him suitable for employment, the terms and conditions pertaining to the said employment as stated in the transition plan shall be clearly conveyed to Mr. Balram. Mr. Balram shall be given a weeks’ time to respond. In case, the institution does not find Mr. Balram suitable for employment or Mr. Balram refuses to the said employment, institute may make suitable arrangements in consultation with the Court Commissioner. e) Since, this Court has not yet adjudicated upon the aspect of administration of assets/funds owned by Mr. Rohan Podar, the learned Court Commissioner as an interim arrangement shall continue to administer the moveable/immoveable assets of Mr. Rohan Podar in accordance with directions 9 (i) and (v) contained in order dated 15.07.2024 passed by this Court[4] f) For the said purpose, learned Court Commissioner as and when required shall address a letter to the concerned bank of Late Mr. Sunil Podar i.e, HDCF Bank, Safdarjung Enclave branch (bearing Account no. 05031930003403) which shall consequently remit/release the aforesaid amount from the bank account of Late Mr. Sunil Podar. Therefore, the bank of Late Mr. Sunil Podar is directed to release amounts as and when a letter is addressed by the learned Court Commissioner for the aforesaid purposes.. g) The logistic and administrative cost that the institution shall incur while shifting and admitting Mr. Rohan Podar to the said institution has been set out in written submission dated 17.04.2025 filed by the learned Court Commissioner as under: “a. Registration: Rs. 3000/-. “ 9. In view of the prevalent situation and keeping in mind the physicaland mental condition of Mr. Rohan Podar, this Court exercising parens partiae jurisdiction, issues the following direction: i.) Ms. Swathi Sukumar (M: +91 9717918652) is appointed as the Court Commissioner who shall henceforth administer the movable/immovable assets of Mr. Rohan Podar, including all the bank accounts (individual or joint), renewal of term deposits, property leases, filing of returns, compliance of statutory formalities etc., All decisions for securing and preservation of the moveable and immoveable assets shall be taken by the Court Commissioner. Reports shall be filed on a monthly basis before this Court in respect of all actions taken. v) The Court Commissioner shall henceforth, inter alia: a) authorise and release funds for all the expenses which are to be incurred for the medical treatment of Mr Rohan Podar, maintenance of his residence and, expenses for the staff, etc. to meet the needs of Mr. Rohan Podar. b) take any and all steps to preserve all movable and immovable assets of the Mr. Rohan Podar, including amounts lying in bank accounts, fixed deposits, term deposits, shares, debentures, bonds, PPF account, pension etc. c) take all steps to secure the revenues of the Mr. Rohan Podar, if any, in the form of lease or rental amounts, dividends from the various companies etc.,” b. Functional Skills Assessment: Rs.7000/ c. Refundable security deposit refunded after deductions of any incidental charges during the stay: Rs. 3 lakhs d. Refundable Medical deposit refunded after one year if not used for any medical emergency: Rs.[2] lakhs e. One month's operational expense of Rs.60,000/ (TOTAL AMOUNT: Rs.5,70,000/-)” As an interim measure, the above amounts be released upon Rohan Podar being shifted to “Ananda by Action for Autism”, from the bank account of Late Ms. Sunil Podar being HDFC Account NO. 05031930003403. Thereafter, the monthly operational expenses of Ananda, being Rs.60,000/- may be remitted before the 30th h) Ananda by Action for Autism shall maintain accounts of expenditure incurred on a monthly basis. Till the subsistence of the aforesaid interim arrangement, the expenditure incurred by the said institution shall be properly accounted and mailed/furnished to the learned Court Commissioner on or before 30 of every month upon the Court Commissioner’s letter to the bank, from bank account of Late Mr. Sunil Podar being HDFC Account NO. 05031930003403, till the matters related to Rohan Podar’s moveable and immoveable properties are decided. The concerned Manager of HDCF Bank, Safdarjung Enclave branch, is directed to comply with the directions. th i) The learned Court Commissioner upon receiving the said accounts of every month. The aforesaid e-mail, solely for the purpose of keeping the parties informed, shall also be copied to the petitioners and respondent nos.[3] and 4 by the institution through the learned Court Commissioner. shall verify the same and thereafter administer the remittance of the monthly expenditure to the said institution through the aforesaid bank account of Late Mr. Sunil Podar. j) Parties to the present petition/family and friends of Mr. Rohan Podar shall be allowed to meet Mr. Rohan Podar at the said institution subject to the following terms:

(i) Parties/visitors shall meet Mr. Rohan Podar at the institution in the common meeting areas, under the supervision of a staff member of the said institution.

(ii) Parties/visitors shall intimate the institution about the proposed visit at least 2 days prior to the visit. On the day of visitation, the visitors shall be allowed to meet Mr. Rohan Podar, provided that the visitor shall check in at the reception and provide valid government approved identification (Aadhar Card/Passport/Pan card/driver license etc.).

(iii) Visiting shall ordinarily be during daytime hours and each visit shall not exceed 2 hours unless otherwise approved by the institution.

(iv) Any disruptive behaviour, emotional distress caused to the Mr.

(v) Parties shall not remove Mr. Rohan Podar from the premises of the institution without prior written approval from the Institution and obtaining an approval order from this Court.

(vi) Visitors must comply with all security and health protocols established by the Institution.

(vii) Visitors shall not be permitted to provide any external medication, food, or other items without prior consent from the Institution.

(viii) Any concerns regarding Mr. Rohan Podar's health, safety or emotional state should be reported immediately to the management of Institution.

(ix) The institution can temporarily suspend visits in case of emergencies, outbreaks, or any other situation requiring restricted access to the premises. However, during the said period, upon prior permission, if the circumstances allows, the institution shall permit communication of Mr. Rohan Podar with the concerned party through video conferencing/any feasible digital mode. k) Learned Court Commissioner is directed to (personally /or depute a colleague) schedule monthly visit to the said institution for inspecting the well-being of Mr. Rohan Podar and file a status report pertaining to the same along with relevant photographs (if any) till the pendency of the present petition. For the said purpose the learned Court Commissioner shall be at liberty to visit as per her convenience on any day and with 2 hours prior intimation to the said institution.

31. As stated hereinabove, at this stage, keeping in mind the best interest and safety of Mr. Rohan Podar, this Court has passed the aforesaid directions to ensure the physical well being of Mr. Rohan Podar. The aspect of administration of assets of Mr. Rohan Podar needs further consideration. However, as an interim arrangement, till the final adjudication of the remaining dispute, the learned Court Commissioner shall continue to administer the moveable/immoveable assets of Mr. Rohan Podar in accordance with directions 9 (i) and (v) contained in order dated 15.07.2024 and aforesaid directions passed by this Court.

32. List for further consideration on 22.07.2025.

SACHIN DATTA, J MAY 28, 2025