Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[Harish]

Hi

Although this seems an academic exercise,can we at least what should 
have been the action point on the judgement. We have the subject, 
husband, brother and major child.



In what way the current law would operate differently. I would 
appreciate those from the sector to particularly respond.



Harish


  On 31/01/2022 18:18, Kanchan Pamnani 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. "





--
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 

RE: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[Preeti Monga]

No one from outside can keep an eye  inside the home! 
What happens inside and that too with  a lady, with such a painfully sad case  
already  befallen upon her! 
Not many of us can even imagine her trauma and her fears! She should  never be 
'given' back to her amazing husband!
Preeti Monga – Chief Executive Officer


Inspiring INCLUSION! Fostering DIGNITY!


Mobile : 91 9871701646
E-mail : preeti.mo...@silver-linings.org
Website : www.silver-linings.org
Our Services: Trainings- Unique Motivation Programmes, Diversity & Inclusion, 
POSH.

Your Choice to partner with us contributes towards quality Education & 
Empowerment of Visually Impaired Girls, and providing them with secure Hostel 
facility at SHIKSHA (A CSR Initiative of Silver Linings)

-Original Message-
From: accessindia@accessindia.org.in [mailto:accessindia@accessindia.org.in] On 
Behalf Of George Abraham
Sent: 01 February 2022 11:44
To: accessindia@accessindia.org.in
Subject: RE: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders 
Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband 
Takes Her Home

Makes for a great headline and maybe content for a movie. However one fears for 
the wife, her safety and happiness. The court must appoint someone who keeps an 
eye on the family at least for a couple of years.

 ! 

-Original Message-
From: accessindia@accessindia.org.in [mailto:accessindia@accessindia.org.in] On 
Behalf Of Sandeep Singh
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 7:22 PM
To: accessindia@accessindia.org.in
Subject: Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders 
Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband 
Takes Her Home

Exactly, I share the same feelings.
It could be the beginning of another round of suffering for her.

On 1/31/22, Payal Ki Jhankar  wrote:
> 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 
> 
> 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 

RE: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[George Abraham]

Makes for a great headline and maybe content for a movie. However one fears for 
the wife, her safety and happiness. The court must appoint someone who keeps an 
eye on the family at least for a couple of years.

 ! 

-Original Message-
From: accessindia@accessindia.org.in [mailto:accessindia@accessindia.org.in] On 
Behalf Of Sandeep Singh
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 7:22 PM
To: accessindia@accessindia.org.in
Subject: Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders 
Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband 
Takes Her Home

Exactly, I share the same feelings.
It could be the beginning of another round of suffering for her.

On 1/31/22, Payal Ki Jhankar  wrote:
> 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 
> 
> 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 

RE: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[Preeti Monga]

Usually even her family will not bother so long she has been  taken back by her 
whatever husband!

Like a basket of fruit or veges!

 

 

Preeti Monga – Chief Executive Officer

 

  

Inspiring INCLUSION! Fostering DIGNITY!

 

 

Mobile : 91 9871701646

E-mail : preeti.mo...@silver-linings.org 
 

Website : www.silver-linings.org  

Our Services: Trainings- Unique Motivation Programmes, Diversity & Inclusion, 
POSH.

 

Your Choice to partner with us contributes towards quality Education & 
Empowerment of Visually Impaired Girls, and providing them with secure Hostel 
facility at SHIKSHA (A CSR Initiative of Silver Linings)

 

From: accessindia@accessindia.org.in [mailto:accessindia@accessindia.org.in] On 
Behalf Of Payal Ki Jhankar
Sent: 31 January 2022 19:04
To: accessindia@accessindia.org.in
Subject: Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders 
Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband 
Takes Her Home

 

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 mailto: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 

Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[Sandeep Singh]

Exactly, I share the same feelings.
It could be the beginning of another round of suffering for her.

On 1/31/22, Payal Ki Jhankar  wrote:
> 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 
> 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. ”
>>
>>
>> 
>> Virus-free.
>> www.avg.com
>> 
>> 

Re: [AI] Decade-old divorce battle ends with reunion Court Orders Immediate Release Of Wife 'Incarcerated' In Mental Hosp For 12 Yrs, Husband Takes Her Home

[Payal Ki Jhankar]

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 
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. ”
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> 
> <#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