Last Updated:March 03, 2025, 22:10 IST

Cerebral palsy (CP) is a group of disorders that affect a person’s movement and muscle coordination and is caused by damage to the brain that happens during development.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted custody of a man suffering from mental illness to his mother, a US national, observing it was in his interest as he was incapable of making independent decisions.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjan Bhuyan considered the fact that the 22-year-old man’s mental age was of a child of eight to 10 years and directed the father to not obstruct the mother-son duo from returning to the US.

Cerebral palsy (CP) is a group of disorders that affect a person’s movement and muscle coordination and is caused by damage to the brain that happens during development.

The court heard the plea of the mother, Sharmila Velamur, against a Madras High Court order which observed the father did not not illegally detain the son in Chennai.

Velamur claimed after her divorce, even as the proceedings for mediation and guardianship of the son were pending in Idaho, the father left the US for Chennai with the son and remained untraceable.

The Madras High Court had interacted with the son, posed multiple questions to him, and based on the answers, determined that he was not illegally detained.

The apex court said the son was directed to undergo medical assessment at NIMHANS, Bengaluru, and an experts’ reports showed he functioned at the level of an eight to 10 year child and was unable to make informed decisions by himself.

“His extent of overall disability, resulting from Mild Intellectual Developmental Disorder and Cerebral Palsy falls under the category of severe disability with 80 per cent,” the court said referring to the reports.

The SC further observed, “Independent decisions made beyond son’s cognitive capacity may not be well-informed or thoroughly considered.” An evaluation committee, the court said, constituted by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare corroborated the experts’ opinions that the son did not possess the capacity to make well-informed, independent decisions on the complex subject matter of the country for his long-term residence.

The apex court said the high court decision was was “simply based on a few minutes of oral interaction with… (son)”.

“We are constrained to hold that the high court’s decision was passed in haste, without fully delving into the nuances of the matter,” the SC said.

If the high court had any doubt as to the reliability of the report and its conclusions, it should have ordered an enquiry through a reputable medical institution, it added.

“Dismissing all aspects of scientific assessment in a highly specialised and niche area of medicine was misconceived and ill-founded,” the bench said.

It came on record the son completed most of his schooling in the US, where he also had access to long-term specialised welfare services and curricula and an Idaho court had appointed Velamur as his permanent guardian.

“We cannot state that …(son) has given up his roots in the US and has developed new roots in India, due to which he should not be displaced,” the bench said.

The order went on ,”We believe it is in the son’s best interests and welfare to return to the US, where he can complete his schooling and reside with his younger brother, under the appellant’s (mother’s) guardianship.” The SC directed Velamur to return to the US with the son within 15 days.

The father was ordered not to cause “any impediment” to their return.

(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed – PTI)