I wonder how can this be classified as ending on a happy note? for a woman to go back home, where she wasn't wanted in the first place? Are there any authorities who review what happens to the woman after she goes back, periodically, to ensure her safety and well-being?
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 at 6:15 PM, Kanchan Pamnani <kanchanpamn...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1/31/22, 6:17 PM about:blank about:blank 1/2 Decade-old divorce battle > ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife ‘Incarcerated’ In > Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home > swati.deshpa...@timesgroup.com Mumbai: A decade-long divorce battle ended > on a happy note with the husband taking the wife home after her > 12-year-long ‘incarceration’ at a mental health hospital following a > magistrate’s order. The family court in Bandra, in its December order, also > noted its own struggle to get a review board to assess and get the woman > released, seven years after the mental hospital had discharged her but her > husband refused to take her home. “This is a case, where only because the > wife was not allowed in the matrimonial home, she had to languish in a > regional mental hospital even after discharge,” judge Swati Chauhan said. > The couple got married in 1993. On the husband’s application abo[1]ut his > wife’s mental health, a metropolitan magistrate in 2009 passed a ‘reception > order’ based on which she was sent to the mental hospital. In 2012, her > husband filed for divorce on the grounds of “cruelty and unsoundness of > mind”. Judge Chauhan heard the case for the first time in October 2021. > “The Mental Healthcare Act 2017 promulgates to protect, promote and fulfill > the rights of such persons during delivery of mental healthcare and service > and matters connected therewith. But this court found it arduous to search > and lay hands on the mental health review board. Unfortunately, the wife > could not benefit from the new law,” the family court order said. “Many may > be languishing in mental hospitals. Therefore, it is necessary to create > awareness about the procedure to approach mental health review boards. ” > Article 21 of the Constitution ensures that no person shall be deprived of > his life or personal liberty except via a legal procedure, noted the judge. > It includes the right to a dignified life, she said, adding that it can > “only sympathize” with the wife who “spent 12 years of her life under > confinement of a regional mental hospital, which is no less than > incarceration”. The court said in 2014, the medical superintendent, in > compliance with the Act, ordered her 1/31/22, 6:17 PM about:blank > about:blank 2/2 discharge as she was found fit. The wife and a nurse were > sent home, but the husband “refused to keep her home” and she was again > ‘detained’ at the mental hospital. Pointing out that “this is a classic > example of how a reception order was misused to drive out a wife from the > matrimonial home and restrict her reentry”, the court said it was “aghast” > at the reason given that the divorce case was pending. The court said it > was “disturbing” that no one checked on her at the hospital; neither her > child on turning a major, nor her brother. The court appointed its deputy > reg istrar as her guardian and sent several production warrants to the > hospital. The hospital produced her in court last October when warned of > facing adverse inference for “lackadaisical approach”. The wife said she > wanted to see her child, expressed no animosity to the husband and wondered > why she was still in hospital when she was declared fit for release. The > court appointed advocate Shabnam Kazi as amicus curiae and a panel of > doctors to examine her and submit its report, which it did on November 22, > stating that she is fit for discharge. The panel said the hospital > continued to implement the 1987 Act though the 2017 Act stipulates that > those with mental illness have a right to live in society and to not > continue at an institution merely because s/he has no family. The husband > initially said he would house her at a shelter home and bear all expenses, > but Kazi opposed and said he would have to provide her alternative > accommodation. The court agreed. The husband then said he would find a > house for her in the same locality. But on November 27, when the court > directed her immediate discharge from the mental hospital, he said he will > take her home. The court said: “All’s well that ends well. ” > > > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > Virus-free. > www.avg.com > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > <#m_-8108511643358288273_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > -- > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of > the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "AccessIndia" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to accessindia+unsubscr...@accessindia.org.in. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/accessindia.org.in/d/msgid/accessindia/000a01d816a0%24ea287cd0%24be797670%24%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/accessindia.org.in/d/msgid/accessindia/000a01d816a0%24ea287cd0%24be797670%24%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list.. Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AccessIndia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to accessindia+unsubscr...@accessindia.org.in. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/accessindia.org.in/d/msgid/accessindia/CAFdvYB8UEH%3DcW1z33F0WdarHJ_r0DNDCqANXVhct7wryTtCG6w%40mail.gmail.com.
