The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition against the Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA), seeking directions to facilitate the adoption of the petitioners’ biological nephew, a minor child holding US citizenship.
The petitioners, Indian citizens residing in Pune, sought to register themselves as prospective adoptive parents under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the Adoption Regulations, 2022. CARA had rejected their registration on the CARINGS portal, contending that the JJ Act does not extend to the adoption of foreign national children who do not fall within the category of children in need of care and protection.
The petitioners argued that as Indian citizens and relatives of the child, they were eligible for in-country relative adoption under Section 56(2) of the JJ Act and Regulation 2(15) of the Adoption Regulations. They challenged CARA’s refusal, asserting that the JJ Act focuses on the adoptive parents’ domicile rather than the child’s citizenship, and highlighted Regulation 63, which permits CARA to relax procedural norms in the child’s best interest.
CARA countered that the JJ Act governs only those children who are “in need of care and protection” or “in conflict with law”, and does not extend to children who are foreign nationals. They further argued that adoption of a US citizen by Indian relatives requires compliance with US adoption laws, or alternatively, the child must first acquire Indian citizenship. CARA also highlighted India’s commitments under the Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption (1993), which discourages private adoptions outside formal legal processes.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale upheld CARA’s stance. The Court held that the JJ Act is inapplicable to children like Moiz, who are neither abandoned, orphaned, nor in conflict with the law. It ruled that Section 56(2) cannot be invoked without establishing that the JJ Act applies to the child.
The Court also found no merit in the argument that CARA’s relaxation powers under Regulation 63 could be exercised in this case, as such relaxations are limited to situations within the JJ Act’s scope. Additionally, the Court affirmed that private adoptions of foreign national children by Indian citizens are not permissible under the framework of the Hague Convention.
Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, observing that the petitioners’ remedies lie in either adopting the child under US law or obtaining Indian citizenship for the child before initiating adoption proceedings in India. The writ petition was dismissed, denying any relief to the petitioners.
Appearances:
Petitioner: Ms. Shirin Merchant, with Ms. Stuti Oswal, for the Petitioners.
Respondent: Mr. Y. S. Bhate, with Mr. Viraj Y. Bhate, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mrs. Neha Bhide, Government Pleader with Ms. P.J.Gavhane, AGP, for Respondent-State.
Ms. Yugandhara Khanwilkar, for Respondent Nos.5 and 6.
