The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over the difficulties faced by a 12-year-old girl and her adoptive parents after an inter-country adoption by close relatives became entangled in conflicting adoption frameworks of India and the United States.
The child, who lost her mother, was adopted two years ago by her maternal aunt and uncle residing in the United States through a valid adoption under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), following the performance of Datta Homam rituals.
However, when the adoptive parents sought to take the child to the United States, they encountered a legal impasse. While US authorities informed them that their adoption approval remained valid until July 28, 2026, they also clarified that adoptions completed under HAMA are not recognised for the purposes of the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. Consequently, the child could not obtain the necessary Hague Adoption Certificate.
Seeking a solution, the adoptive parents applied for approval under India's Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and the Adoption Regulations, 2022. However, the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) rejected the request, citing its policy that cases involving children already adopted under HAMA cannot be processed under the Juvenile Justice framework.
Counsel for Petitioners informed a vacation Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that the family had become trapped in a "bilateral deadlock" with no available administrative remedy. They argued that India would not process the adoption under the Juvenile Justice Act, while the United States would not recognise the HAMA adoption for Hague Convention purposes.
Taking note of the predicament, Justice Nagarathna sharply questioned CARA's stand and described the situation as an instance of "bureaucratic red tapism." The Court observed that if the adoption under HAMA was found to be legally valid after due verification, there appeared to be no reason for CARA to withhold the necessary clearance.
Recalling a similar matter involving the overseas adoption of motherless twins by a close relative, the Bench questioned why authorities continued to adopt an obstructionist approach in cases where relatives sought to provide care and a stable future to orphaned children.
The Court further remarked that authorities should not stand in the way of a child obtaining better opportunities and a secure future merely because of procedural hurdles.
Posting the matter for further hearing on July 14, the Supreme Court directed the respondents to take all necessary steps for processing the petitioners' application in the meantime, without prejudice to their legal contentions in the pending proceedings.
Picture Source :
