Bond With Child No Ground To Take Adoption Out Of Turn, Would Encourage Child Trafficking: Telangana High Court
The petitioner had filed a petition seeking custody of his adopted daughter aged about two years.
The Telangana High Court held that merely because an emotional bond had developed between the petitioner, his wife, and the child, the authorities could not be directed to grant adoption out of turn.
The petitioner had filed a petition seeking custody of his adopted daughter aged about two years.
A Bench of Justice T. Madhavi Devi held, “as adoption of the child by the petitioner and his wife is not legal and is not in accordance with CARA guidelines, the same cannot be approved by this Court. The child trafficking is a serious issue in India and therefore, the Government of India has framed the guidelines known as CARA guidelines for adoption of abandoned and orphaned children.”
Advocate Rapolu Bhaskar appeared for the Petitioner.
The petitioner challenged the action of respondents in detaining the custody of the child at the Child Protection Center and not handing her over to him, contending that the same was illegal and arbitrary. He sought a direction to respondents to hand over custody of the child for care and protection.
According to the petitioner, he married in 2014 and, having no children out of the wedlock, approached the District Collector for adoption of an orphan girl, which remained pending. In the meantime, through certain persons, he came to know that someone had a girl child in his custody and intended to give her in adoption. The petitioner and his wife allegedly adopted the child in May 2023 by conducting Datha Homum and claimed to have taken care of the child with love and affection since she was one month old.
It was stated that following complaints of child selling, complaint was registered for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, against them. The petitioner and his wife were also arrayed as Accused. The child was taken from the petitioner’s custody and placed in Sri Shishu Sankshema Shakha, Nalgonda.
The counsel for the petitioner relied on photographs and on the Supreme Court’s decision in Dasari Anil Kumar and Another v. The Child Welfare Project Director and Others, seeking similar relief.
The Government Pleader for Women Development and Child contended that the adoption was illegal and not in accordance with CARA guidelines, and that the child was presently being well looked after by the Government.
The Court observed, “the child is not adopted from the natural parents and one Nakka Yadagiri is the person involved in giving the child in adoption to the petitioner and a crime has also been registered against him as well as the petitioner and his wife. This is not a one incident where he is involved and therefore, it appears to be a clear case of child trafficking. The case is under investigation.”
The Court noted, “it appears that the petitioner and his wife have taken good care of the child, but the procedure adopted by them for taking a child in adoption cannot be appreciated or approved.”
It further held, “The petitioner and his wife have, however, made an application to CARA for adoption and they have to wait 9 for their turn to get a child in adoption. On the ground that a bond has already developed between the child and the petitioner herein and his wife, the respondents cannot be directed to refer the matter to CARA to be taken out of turn and consider the case of the baby child Sharanya for adoption to the petitioner and his wife. That would amount to and would lead to a prescription for illegal adoptions. It would also encourage child trafficking in the country.”
The Court also noted that the Supreme Court’s order in Dasari Anil Kumar was passed under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and was not to be treated as a precedent. The High Court declined to grant any relief and dismissed the writ petition.
Cause Title: Muthineni Venakanna v. The State of Telangana
