When a parent develops advanced dementia, or a family member with a serious psychiatric illness can no longer manage their own affairs, families in Sindh often discover that no one has legal authority to operate the bank account, collect rent, sign a transfer or consent on the person’s behalf. The law’s answer is a court-appointed guardian of the person and a manager of the property under Chapter V of the Sindh Mental Health Act, 2013. This guide explains who can apply, why the permission of the Advocate General Sindh must come first, what medical evidence may be relevant, and how the case proceeds before the District Judge.
Key takeaways
- Guardianship of an adult who lacks capacity is governed by Chapter V (sections 29–46) of the Sindh Mental Health Act, 2013, not the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
- A relative must first obtain the written consent of the Advocate General of Sindh (section 29). The Act does not itself make a medical-board report a precondition to that consent, although medical evidence will ordinarily be important to the inquiry.
- The application is then filed before the Court of Protection, i.e. the District Court of the district where the person resides.
- The Court may appoint a guardian of the person (s.32) and a manager of property (s.33), who then act under continuing court supervision.
- Orders are appealable to the High Court of Sindh within 60 days (s.46).
The legal framework in Sindh
Before 2013, adult guardianship in Pakistan was governed by the Lunacy Act, 1912 and then the Mental Health Ordinance, 2001. After the Eighteenth Amendment made health a provincial subject, Sindh enacted its own statute. Section 61 of the Sindh Mental Health Act, 2013 repeals the Mental Health Ordinance, 2001 in its application to Sindh, and section 60 gives the Act overriding effect over any inconsistent law. The Act was last amended by Sindh Act No. XIX of 2015.
Chapter V of the Act, titled Judicial Proceedings for Appointment of Guardian of Person and Manager of the Property of the Mentally Disordered, sets out the statutory framework for these proceedings. It is distinct from the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, which deals with guardianship of minors (see our page on guardianship and child custody). Where the person concerned is an adult whose capacity is impaired by a mental disorder and the relief sought falls within Chapter V, the Sindh Mental Health Act provides the relevant statutory route.
Key definitions
- Court of Protection — a District Court having jurisdiction under the Act and designated as such by the Government of Sindh (section 2(e)). “Court” in Chapter V means the Court of Protection (s.2(f)).
- Mental disorder — defined in s.2(n) by reference to a mentally ill person in need of treatment for a disorder of the mind, other than mental impairment and severe personality disorder. The Sindh High Court has treated dementia and Alzheimer’s disease as falling within the Act (see the case law below).
- Relative — any person related by blood, marriage or adoption under the personal law (s.2(v)). Only a relative can initiate section 29 proceedings.
- Psychiatrist and approved psychiatrist — PMDC-registered medical practitioners with a recognised postgraduate qualification (in psychiatry, for a psychiatrist), the latter also approved by the Sindh Mental Health Authority (s.2(a), (u)).
When is a guardian or manager needed?
Section 29 applies whenever a person possesses property and is alleged to be mentally disordered. The purpose of the inquiry is to determine whether the person is mentally disordered and incapable of managing himself, his property and his affairs. Typical situations include:
- an elderly parent with advanced dementia whose pension, bank accounts or rental income must be managed;
- a sole owner or director whose business, shares or partnership interest cannot be operated (see s.42 on dissolution of partnership and s.43 on shares and securities);
- a property sale agreed before the onset of illness that must now be completed (s.38);
- a family dispute where one relative is suspected of misusing the person’s assets.
Step-by-step procedure
-
Medical evidence and assessment of the person
The process begins with evidence of incapacity. Section 29 does not expressly require a medical-board report before the Advocate General gives written consent. Depending on the circumstances and prevailing office or court practice, the request for consent may be supported by medical records, specialist reports or a medical-board assessment. During the judicial inquiry, section 30 also empowers the Court to require examination and obtain a report on the person’s mental capacity and condition. The report should state the diagnosis, whether the condition is permanent or temporary, and, crucially, whether the person is capable of managing himself and, separately, his property and affairs. That distinction matters because section 30(3) allows the Court to find that a person lacks capacity to manage affairs while remaining capable of self-care.
Treating physicians’ records, specialist opinions and any medical-board report may all be relevant; their weight will depend on the circumstances and the Court’s inquiry.
-
Application to the Advocate General Sindh for written consent
Section 29 requires the applicant to have “obtained consent in writing of the Advocate General of Sindh” before moving the Court. This is a filter against misuse: the Act does not want relatives litigating over an elderly person’s estate by the simple step of alleging incapacity. The Act does not list the documents, and the Advocate General’s office may call for more in a given case, but a well-prepared request typically includes:
Document Why it is needed Medical records, specialist reports and, where available or requested, medical-board report Evidence relevant to mental disorder and capacity CNICs of the vulnerable person and the applicant Identity and proof of residence (determines the competent district) Family tree / list of legal heirs with addresses Establishes the applicant is a “relative” and identifies persons to be noticed Affidavits or no-objection statements of other legal heirs Shows the family is not contesting, or discloses a dispute Schedule of immovable and movable property, bank accounts, shares and pensions Section 29 is triggered by possession of property; the Court will later require an inventory Affidavit of the applicant explaining the need and proposed guardian/manager Justifies the appointment and the suitability of the nominee The consent letter, with its reference number, must be filed with the court application. In the Talpur case discussed below, the Sindh High Court rejected a maintainability objection precisely because the Advocate General’s consent was shown to be part of the trial court record. It is also worth knowing that consent can be questioned: in the same case, the opposing relatives alleged that consent had been obtained by misrepresentation, and the Advocate General’s office opened an inquiry. Full and candid disclosure at this stage avoids later challenges.
-
Filing before the District Judge (Court of Protection)
With consent in hand, the relative files the application before the Court of Protection “within whose jurisdiction such person is residing” (s.29), that is, before the District Judge of the district where the vulnerable person resides (for example, the District Judge, Karachi South, for a resident of Saddar or Clifton). Jurisdiction turns on the person’s residence, not on where the applicant lives or where the property is located.
The District Judge may transfer the case to an Additional District Judge. The High Court has held that an Additional District Judge hearing a transferred matter exercises the District Judge’s powers under the Sindh Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962, so the order is not without jurisdiction.
-
Notice, examination and inquiry
Section 30 regulates the inquiry. The Court must give notice of the time and place of the inquiry to the alleged mentally disordered person (with substituted service where personal service would be ineffectual), and may notify relatives and any other person it considers appropriate. The Court may:
- require the person to attend for personal examination by the Court, or by anyone from whom the Court wants a report on mental capacity;
- authorise named persons, such as a fresh medical board, to have access to the person for examination;
- appoint two or more assessors to assist it (s.30(2)).
For women who by custom should not be compelled to appear in public, attendance and examination follow the ordinary civil practice for such witnesses (s.30(1)(f)). If the person lives more than fifty miles from the Court, the Court may issue a commission to a subordinate court to hold the inquiry (s.31).
-
Findings of the Court
On completing the inquiry, the Court decides under section 30(3) whether the person is suffering from a mental disorder and is incapable of managing himself and his affairs. It may instead make a special finding that the person cannot manage his affairs but can look after himself and is not a danger to himself or others, or make any other order in the person’s best interests. The best-interests standard runs through the whole chapter.
-
Appointment of guardian and manager
Where the person cannot take care of himself, the Court may appoint any suitable person as guardian, or order care in a psychiatric facility with provision for maintenance (s.32). Where the person cannot manage property, the Court shall appoint a suitable manager of the property (s.33(1)). The same person may hold both roles, or the Court may split them.
An important safeguard: under section 33(2), a legal heir of the person cannot be appointed guardian or manager unless the Court, for reasons recorded in writing, considers the appointment to be for the person’s benefit. Because heirs stand to inherit, the application should explain why the proposed heir is nonetheless the right choice, for example as the primary carer, with other heirs consenting. The guardian and manager may be paid an allowance out of the person’s property as fixed by the Court (s.33(3) and s.35).
Where the illness appears temporary, the Court may instead direct that the property, or part of it, be applied for maintenance for a temporary period (s.44).
Duties and limits after appointment
Appointment is not the end of the court’s involvement. The manager acts as a fiduciary under continuing supervision:
- Responsibility for care: the manager is responsible for the care, treatment costs and maintenance of the person and dependent family members (s.34).
- Powers, with restrictions: the manager may exercise the owner’s powers, realise claims and pay debts, but cannot mortgage, charge, sell, gift, exchange, lease or give on bailment any movable or immovable property without the Court’s permission. Before granting permission, the Court must notify relatives or friends and consider their objections (s.36).
- Inventory and accounts: an inventory of assets, claims and liabilities is due within three months of appointment, and annual accounts within three months of each financial year’s close. All transactions must go through a bank authorised by the Court, and any relative may challenge the accounts (s.37).
- Surplus funds: sums beyond current needs are to be invested through state-owned investment agencies (s.40).
- Business premises: the Court may direct sale of business premises after notice to dependants and relatives (s.39).
- Penalties: a manager who wilfully neglects or refuses to deliver accounts or property within the time fixed commits an offence, as does anyone making a false statement in an application or report (s.52).
Resignation, removal, recovery and appeal
A guardian or manager may resign with the Court’s permission, or be removed for sufficient cause with reasons recorded, and the Court may appoint a replacement (s.41). If the Court has reason to believe the person has recovered, it may direct an inquiry and set aside all orders made under the Act (s.45). Any order under Chapter V may be appealed to the High Court within sixty days (s.46).
What the Sindh High Court has said
Advocate General’s consent, jurisdiction of the Additional District Judge and the medical board
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 36 of 2023, High Court of Sindh, Circuit Court Hyderabad, decided 27 May 2024 (Khadim Hussain Soomro, J.), arising from Protection Petition No. 04 of 2023, Mst. Shahul Talpur v. Meer Shah Muhammad Talpur and others — read the judgment on caselaw.shc.gov.pk
A daughter applied under section 29 alleging that her father, then around 75 to 80 years old and diagnosed with dementia, was being financially exploited. The appellant argued that the application was not maintainable without the Advocate General’s permission, that only the District Judge (not an Additional District Judge) could hear it, and that dementia should be assessed by a neurologist rather than a psychiatrist.
The High Court dismissed the appeal. It found that the Advocate General’s consent had been obtained before filing and was on the record; that the application had been filed before the District Judge and transferred, so the Additional District Judge acted with the District Judge’s authority; and that the inquiry should be completed on expert evidence before any conclusion was drawn. It directed the Medical Superintendent of the Sir Cowasjee Jehangir Institute of Psychiatry to constitute a board of two senior psychiatrists and a neurologist to examine the patient and report to the trial court within fifteen days.
Practical lesson: file the consent letter with the application, file before the District Judge, and ask for a multidisciplinary medical board where the diagnosis may be contested.
The Court of Protection’s jurisdiction over questions of mental capacity
High Court Appeal No. 328 of 2018, Farrukh Afzal Munif v. Muhammad Afzal Munif and others, High Court of Sindh at Karachi, decided 10 September 2021 (Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan, JJ.) — read the judgment on caselaw.shc.gov.pk
A son filed a civil suit on the original side seeking declarations, cancellation and recovery of assets, alleging that relatives had transferred his father’s property while the father suffered from dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. The plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, relying among other things on sections 29, 30 and 60 of the Sindh Mental Health Act.
The Division Bench upheld the view that where the reliefs claimed depend on a determination of a person’s mental health, the proper forum is the Court of Protection in proceedings under the Act. It clarified, however, that the civil court’s jurisdiction is not ousted absolutely: where the reliefs are otherwise lawful and independent, a civil suit may still lie. The appeal was ultimately dismissed as infructuous following the father’s death, with liberty to raise objections in succession proceedings.
Practical lesson: where the relief sought substantially depends on a judicial determination of a living person’s mental capacity, proceedings under section 29 should be considered. The Division Bench expressly clarified that the civil court’s jurisdiction is not absolutely ousted; an otherwise lawful and independent civil claim may still lie. After death, the Court can no longer examine the person in a Chapter V inquiry. Depending on the claims and available evidence, disputes may need to be addressed in other appropriate proceedings, including succession proceedings.
No “additional” guardian; only removal and replacement
M.A. No. 73 of 2022, High Court of Sindh at Karachi, decided 29 May 2023 — read the order on caselaw.shc.gov.pk
An application to appoint an additional guardian alongside an existing one was held not maintainable. The Court read the provision on appointment of a new guardian as permitting resignation or removal and replacement, not the addition of a co-guardian. Although the proceedings had been framed under the Mental Health Ordinance, 2001, the Court noted that the Ordinance stands repealed in Sindh by the 2013 Act; the equivalent provision today is section 41 of the Sindh Mental Health Act.
Practical lesson: frame any application under the 2013 Act, and if an existing guardian is failing, seek removal and replacement for sufficient cause.
Practical tips for families
- Act early. Transactions signed by a person who lacked capacity may be challenged. After death, the Court can no longer examine the person in a Chapter V inquiry; any challenge to past transactions must be considered through the appropriate proceedings and available evidence.
- Bring the family on board. Consent or no-objection statements from other legal heirs smooth both the Advocate General stage and the section 33(2) requirement for appointing an heir.
- Separate the person from the property. Consider whether one relative should be guardian (day-to-day care) and another manager (finances), or whether a neutral professional should manage a large or disputed estate.
- Plan for accounting. Open a court-authorised bank account, keep receipts, and diarise the three-month inventory and annual account deadlines under section 37.
- Seek permission before any transaction. Sale, mortgage or lease without the Court’s sanction under section 36 exposes the manager to liability and the transaction to challenge.
Frequently asked questions
Which court appoints a guardian for a mentally ill adult in Sindh?
The Court of Protection, which is a District Court designated by the Government of Sindh (s.2(e)). The application is filed before the District Judge of the district where the person resides and may be transferred to an Additional District Judge.
Is permission of the Advocate General Sindh mandatory?
Yes. Section 29 requires the applicant to have obtained the Advocate General’s written consent before applying. File the consent letter with the application.
Can a son, daughter or spouse be appointed guardian?
Yes, but because they are legal heirs, the Court must record reasons why the appointment benefits the person (s.33(2)).
Can a guardian sell the property of a person with dementia?
Only with the Court’s prior permission under section 36, after notice to relatives and consideration of their objections.
Is the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 used for adults?
No. That Act concerns minors. For adults who lack capacity because of a mental disorder in Sindh, the Sindh Mental Health Act, 2013 applies and overrides inconsistent laws (s.60).
Can the order be appealed?
Yes, to the High Court of Sindh within sixty days of the order (s.46).
Need help with a guardianship application?
Legum Law Firm has advised families in Karachi since 1992. We assist with the medical board process, the application for the Advocate General’s consent, proceedings before the District Judge and ongoing compliance as guardian or manager. Contact us or call +92 213 752 4040.
This article is general information on the law of Sindh as of September 2026 and is not legal advice. Statutory references are to the Sindh Mental Health Act, 2013 as amended by Sindh Act No. XIX of 2015. Documentary requirements of the Advocate General’s office are based on practice and may vary by case.
