Offence of abandonment of parents not attracted unless there is 'total neglect': Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the proceedings against a man who was accused of abandoning his elderly father under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (the Act). [Dr Pramod John v State of Kerala].While doing so, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that unless there is a total and complete abandonment of the parent, the offence of abandonment of senior citizen punishable under Section 24 of the Act cannot be said to have been committed. "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. The transportation of a parent between the children could be for various purposes and even based on an understanding arrived at either between the children or between the parent and the child.", the Court explained in its judgment.Therefore, leaving a senior citizen somewhere with requisite arrangements for their care would not constitute 'abandonment', the Court said. .The judgment was passed on a petition moved by one Pramod John (petitioner) whose sister had filed a complaint against him for allegedly sending their father in a taxi from Ernakulam to Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner's sister alleged that he had abandoned their father, who is a senior citizen suffering from age-related illnesses, without adequate care.The petitioner then approached the High Court to quash the proceedings initiated against him. .The petitioner's counsel argued that the complaint filed was baseless and motivated by malice, as it was filed three months after the alleged incident.They also submitted that arranging a taxi for transporting the elderly parent to his daughter's house did not amount to abandonment as per law.On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor contended that the matter required a trial for proper adjudication and that quashing the proceedings at this stage was inappropriate..The Court after going through the submissions found that the first information report (FIR) registered cited Section 20(3) of the Act which does not exist. The correct provision for abandonment was Section 24 of the Act, the Court said.Section 24 states:"Whoever, having the care or protection of senior citizen, leaves such senior citizen in any place with the intention of wholly abandoning such senior citizen, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months or fine which may extent to five thousands rupees or with both.".The Court noted that the provision uses the word "wholly" to describe the offense and concluded that the circumstances in the case did not demonstrate a total neglect by the son."It is evident that the offence arises when a senior citizen or a parent is abandoned wholly by a person who is bound to take care of the senior citizen/parent...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.", the Court explained.It also observed that the prosecution's case lacked substance, noting that the complaint did not originate from the elderly parent himself but from his daughter..Therefore, the Court proceeded to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. .The petitioner was represented by KR Vinod, MS Letha, Nabil Khader, and Rahul S.Public Prosecutor Ashi MC appeared for the state..[Read Order]