The Indian Express

Return to Story Page
To print: Select File and then Print from your browser's menu

Christian parents can now adopt

EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE

MUMBAI, OCT 27: In a bold and definitive judgement, Justice F I Rebello of the Bombay High Court on Thursday held that High Courts do indeed have the powers under Article 225 (in matters of protection of minors and children) to give children and minors up for adoption, even if there are no legislations for adoption in some personal laws. In fact, a child's right to be adopted, the High Court has held, flows from Article 21 of the Constitution that guarantees life and liberty to every individual.

``The fundamental right to life of an orphaned child includes a right to be adopted by parents, to have a home, name and nationality and it is an enforceable right, justiciable in civil courts'', the pathbreaking order states.

While doing so, the Bombay High Court has also held that couples or parents who have been made guardians under the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1860 can move for adoption of their wards after a two year period. Following which, a court would have the powers to allow them to adopt thechildren, provided certain provisions have been met with.

The around 200-page judgement delivered in an open court today, came in two guardianship petitions filed by Manuel Theodore D'Souza and Gordon Maurice Tone separately, both of whom had already been granted two children, a girl and a boy respectively under the Guardianship and Wards Act. However, since the two Christian families were keen on adopting the children and because there is no law in the country that allows for adoption except by Hindu couples, the petitions called for an in-depth look into the many issues involved.

Rebello had heard numerous counsels, including State Advocate General C J Sawant, Additional Solicitor General D Y Chandrachud, advocate for the Archbishop, Joaquim Reis, and advocates like Anamika Chatterjee, Nandita Chickermane, Flavia Agnes, Colin Gonsalves and Mihir Desai had given submissions on the issue.

In his judgement, Rebello admitted that there were many potholes in the road ahead, but hoped that the judgement``will awaken the sensitivity of our law makers, so all children in the new millennium will have an opportunity to enjoy the joys of childhood''.

In the absence of any legislation in this matter, following the powers conferred on the High Courts under Article 225 and the powers of the Bombay High Court as `parents patriae' (parent of the people) under the Letters Patent clause 17, Rebello has held that the district courts and High Courts pending further legislation will have the powers to give children for adoption.

He has passed ``binding'' directions to all the state governments under the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court, that includes Goa. Accordingly,

  • All courts will have to first satisfy themselves that the guardians will be suitable parents and a compulsory period of two years will have to pass before the adoption petitions can be filed.

  • It will be the duty of the court to ascertain that the financial status, the health and the medical reports of the adoptive parents are sound.Progress reports of the child will have to be collected and the views of the Indian Council for Social Welfare (ICSW) will have to be taken into account.

  • The personal laws of the adoptive parents will apply to the child whose right to inheritance will be the same as a natural child.

  • Adoptive parents will have the right to rectify the Register of Births, if they feel so, giving their names to the child.

    Rebello has held Article 21 that guarantees life and liberty to an individual, as paramount. In fact, he felt that a common civil code was not necessary for the implementation of this right. ``The right of a child to be adopted, is independent, and is not pursuant to any Common Civil Code,'' the judgement says. Towards this, apart from Article 21, the court has drawn powers from the fact that India is a signatory to a large number of international conventions including the Convention on Child Rights, and the Supreme Court has upheld the right of the executive to enforce such internationalconventions.

    And since the Christian religion does not bar any Christian couple from adopting, (the Christian Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1995 supported by the Catholic bishops and the Maharashtra Adoption Act, 1995, both are pending with the legislatures) the court has held that the absence of a legislation cannot stop guardians from seeking adoption. ``Parents cannot be discriminated from adopting a child without the state being accused of arbitrariness and infracting the Article 14 (guaranteeing equality to all citizens). Once a Guardianship petition is allowed, the consequences must follow that the legal guardian can move for adoption'', the order states unambiguously.

    Copyright © 1999 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.

    Net Express

    ------------------------------------------------------------

    This story was printed from Net Express located at http://www.expressindia.com. Net Express provides a portal to India, with news from The Indian Express and The Financial Express along with sites on travel and tourism, the entertainment industry, the power sector, the environment and much more.

    ------------------------------------------------------------