No law to protect parents who are not sr. citizens: PIL in HC

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Oct 03 2017 | 5:32 PM IST
A 57-year-old man has moved the Delhi High Court claiming absence of a law for the protection of parents, who are not yet senior citizens, from hostility and violence by their children.
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar sought the AAP government's stand on the plea which also wants that the term 'senior citizen' to include parents who have not yet attained that status as they are below 60 years of age.
The court directed that the petitioner be given police protection when he visits his house where he has not been staying as he apprehended threat to his life at the hands of his 34-year-old younger son.
The bench sought a status report from the police by November 27 on the man's allegations against his younger son.
The petitioner, Ghanshyam Singh Rawat, has alleged that his younger son, along with some associates, had severely assaulted him and tried to kill him when he refused to sell his house and give the proceeds to his son.
Rawat claimed that despite lodging a complaint, the police had failed to act against his son.
The petitioner, represented by advocate Ashok Agarwal, also claimed that while he was hospitalised after the assault, his son broke into the house and forcibly occupied it.
In his plea, Rawat has said that he does not want any maintenance from his son, but only wants to live in peace.
He has further claimed that he cannot avail any benefit under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act as it caters only to parents who have attained the status of senior citizen.
The petition has sought striking down of the provision in the Act which creates the distinction between parents who are senior citizens and those who are not.
He said the Act does not contain any provision to meet the needs of persons like him, who do not seek any maintenance from their children but only wish to be allowed to live in peace.
He has also contended that such people need to be protected from hostile and violent children who are only interested in grabbing the properties of their parents and do not care how much suffering they cause.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Oct 03 2017 | 5:32 PM IST

Next Story