The Bombay High Court allowed an application filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act 2015 for challenging the Order dated 8th March 2022, passed by the learned District Judge by which the Judge had rejected the application filed by the applicants for the adoption of the minor child.
The court observed that the reason given by the Competent Court is not only contrary to the provisions of the JJ Act but is also contrary to the recommendation made by the District Child Welfare Officer and the Assistant Director of CARA.
Brief Facts:
On 13th August 2020, the applicants filed Civil Miscellaneous Application before the Learned District Judge for seeking the adoption of the minor child and declaration of Applicant No. 1 as a parent. After following the necessary procedure, a detailed report was prepared by the District Child Protection Unit. All the necessary verifications regarding the status and health of the prospective parent and the child and the financial condition of the parties were done. However, the learned Judge rejected the application on the ground that the prospective parent is a single lady and a divorcee.
The learned Judge observed that the prospective parent being a working lady, will not be able to give personal attention to the child per contra the biological parents would be in a better condition to take care of the child.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned Counsel for the Applicants submitted that the observations of the learned Judge are contrary to the report submitted by the District Child Protection Unit and the pre-approval letter issued by the Central Adoption Resource Authority. Further, he argued that all the procedural statutory requirements were fully complied with, and thus there was no reason to reject the application for adoption; the reason recorded by the learned Judge for rejecting the application is perverse and unjust. Thus, the Counsel contended, the impugned Order be set aside, and the Application for adoption made by the Applicants be allowed.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that perusal of the record showed that all the statutory compliances were done, and CARA has issued a pre-approved letter for finalizing the adoption case by completing the procedure for issuance of the Adoption Order. He, therefore, submitted that appropriate Order may be passed.
Observations of the Court:
The Court said that the Competent Court has rejected the application only on the ground that the prospective parent is a single lady and a divorcee, and she being a working lady, will not be able to give personal attention to the child; per contra, the biological parents would be in a better condition to take care of the child. Sub-section (3) of Section 57 holds a single or divorced person eligible for taking a child in adoption. Sub-section (1) of Section 57 states that the prospective adoptive parent shall be physically fit, financially sound, mentally alert, and highly motivated to adopt a child to provide a good upbringing to the child.
Thus, the Court observed, the reason given by the Competent Court is not only contrary to the provisions of the JJ Act but is also contrary to the recommendation made by the District Child Welfare Officer and the Assistant Director of CARA. Even otherwise, the reason given by the Competent Court is unfounded and baseless. The Court remarked that by no stretch of the imagination, a single parent can be held to be ineligible to be an adoptive parent on the ground that he/she is a working person.
The decision of the Court:
The Bombay High Court, allowing the application, held that the reason recorded by the Competent Court is unfounded, illegal, perverse, unjust, and unacceptable.
Case Title: Miss Shabnamjahan & Ors. v The State of Maharashtra
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Gauri Godse
Case no.: CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 127 OF 2022
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. N.S. Shah
Advocate for the Defendant: Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source : https://unsplash.com/s/photos/father-and-son
