In a tense and emotionally heavy hearing, the Bombay High Court came down strongly on what it described as the “unpardonable conduct” of a man who allegedly abandoned his 76-year-old mother at Holy Family Hospital, Bandra. The judges, visibly disturbed at points, repeatedly stressed that the “right to life and health is non-negotiable.”
Background
The dispute began on 24 August 2025, when Mrs. Mohini Puri was admitted to the hospital by her son after she suffered imbalance and weakness. Doctors noted she was malnourished, weighing just 45 kg, and later diagnosed her with a major strokean acute right MCA infarct. Since then, the hospital claims it has cared for her continuously, even after the son stopped payments, leaving an outstanding bill of around ₹16 lakh.
The hospital alleged that the son-Respondent No. 3-refused to cooperate, delayed medical decisions, frequently argued with staff, and ultimately raised allegations of medical negligence to avoid paying dues. By October, doctors declared her stable for discharge, but the son allegedly refused to take her home. His excuses-ranging from illness to needing “15 more days” for a second opinion-didn’t convince the court. “This conduct is not that of a prudent person,” the bench remarked.
Court’s Observations
The bench, comprising Justices A.S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, made several sharp observations.
At one point, the court noted, “This is a case which shocks the conscience… where a son has failed to look after and care for his own ailing mother.”
The judges repeatedly pointed out that:
- The hospital treated her “appropriately” and stabilized her even while facing allegations of negligence.
- The son continued using the hospital’s facilities while refusing to settle dues.
- His refusal to give an undertaking to care for his mother-even when directly asked in court-showed clear abandonment.
His lawyer informed the court that after being told he must commit to caring for his mother, he “flatly refused” and left the courtroom without giving instructions.
The court also reprimanded the authorities:
- The Bandra Police showed “inaction and misdirected steps” despite detailed complaints from the hospital.
- The Senior Citizen Tribunal failed to act despite having suo motu powers to protect abandoned senior citizens.
The bench quoted the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, emphasizing that abandonment is a punishable offence and that properties of senior citizens can be protected from neglecting children.
“The State is duty-bound to step in where family fails,” the judges observed.
Decision
While the final operative directions appear later in the judgment, the court made its stance unmistakably clear:
- It held a prima facie case of abandonment against the son.
- It directed that the State must step in to protect the patient, ensure her medical care, and consider shifting her either to her home or a government hospital, depending on medical assessment.
- It urged the Senior Citizens Tribunal to take suo motu action to protect her movable and immovable properties for her welfare.
The court closed its order stating that the patient’s rights come first-and that the law will not look kindly at those who abandon vulnerable parents.
Case Title: The Bandra Holy Family Hospital Society & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case No.: Criminal Writ Petition No. 5823 of 2025
Case Type: Criminal Writ Petition (Senior Citizen Abandonment & Hospital Dispute)
Decision Date: 17 November 2025
