MUMBAI: Bombay high court refused to direct the transfer of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) bonds to the mother and wife of a man who has renounced the world and become a Jain sadhu.
“This court, in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226, will not enter the arena of disputed claims between the parties,” said Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale, asking them to seek civil remedy before an appropriate forum.

In their petition filed last year, the 77-year-old mother and 48-year-old wife said ‘M’ was the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). “Renouncing worldly affairs amounts to civil death of M and as such all his properties would devolve upon his other legal heirs, namely the petitioners.” M’s son and daughter have also taken sanyas.
M holds bonds worth about Rs 56 lakh and they mature on Sept 18, 2026. As per RBI norms, bonds are not transferable except in the case of natural death.
Whether sanyas is taken is mixed question of facts: HC
Bombay high court refused to direct the transfer of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) bonds to the mother and wife of a man, M, who has renounced the world and became a Jain sadhu.
Prior to taking sanyas, M sought to know from HDFC Bank the procedure for transmission of RBI bonds to his legal heirs. However, the bank did not accept sanyas as civil death and refused to transfer RBI bonds.
After M took sanyas, his mother and wife applied to the bank, but it failed to transfer/transmit the bonds to them. HDFC’s advocate referred to the bank’s reply that there is no declaration of M being a karta.
The date of maturity is Sept 18, 2026, and as per RBI guidelines, the bonds are not transferable except in the case of natural death. There is no succession certificate/probate submitted and no conclusive evidence to corroborate the claim that M and his children have taken sanyas.
The petitioners’ advocate showed various documents to prove beyond doubt that M and his children have taken sanyas.
In their Feb 21order, the judges agreed with HDFC’s advocate that “whether M and his children took sanyas and renounced the world is a mixed question of facts”.
While their advocate submitted an invitation card with photos of the sanyas ceremony as also M’s ‘no-objection’ to their names being entered as holders of the RBI bonds, etc., “All these are photocopies. The respondents have not recognised these documents as proof of M taking sanyas,” the judges said.
They cited a Delhi HC decision that states the ‘mere fact that a person declares he has become a sanyasi or describes himself as such or wears clothes worn by sanyasis would not make him a sanyasi.’ Also, he ‘must perform necessary ceremonies without which renunciation will not complete.’
Dismissing the petition, the judges said, “It would be appropriate for the petitioners to have recourse to appropriate civil remedy before the appropriate court/forum…” to their grievance.