Bombay High Court annulled and annulled a civil court order in March 2023 ordering the adoptive parents of a two-year-old boy to give custody to the boy's biological parents, pending trial. their adoption application.
The bench included Judge Sharmila Deshumkh hearing the adoptive parents' petition challenging the civil court's order to dismiss their adoption application. They announced their biological parents officially adopted them on July 16, 2021, just two days after the boy was born. This was opposed by the biological parents.
The adoptive parents' pleas claim that the child was born on July 14, 2021, and that the biological parents do not want to keep him. Based on the adoption deed, the adoptive parents wanted to apply for adoption in 2021 to legally adopt the child. However, this was rejected in 2022.
Later, the couple wanted reconsideration, which was also denied on 8 March 2023. A Mumbai civil court ordered the return of custody of the minor child to the biological parents. The adoptive parents later challenged all these orders in the Bombay High Court. The child's biological parents are unmarried and have also lost their jobs due to the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021. Therefore, the couple decided to keep the child in the hospital for a few days. In 2021, a woman gave her child to an NGO for adoption. The adoptive parents adopted the child from the NGO 2 days later.
However, in the meantime, the biological parents realized it was a child trafficker after the woman they had come in contact with was arrested by Mumbai police in a case. The biological parents also said that they had discussed it with the family and then decided to adopt the child. Therefore, they also object to the adoption application.
After reviewing submissions from both parties, the bench said the lower court order was issued in brief without giving the parents a chance to present evidence and the case was decided on the basis of affidavits.
“Considering that respecting the conditions of adoption must be considered, it is necessary to question the matter and the evidence that can be provided and since this has not been done there is no question of ' registration presents 'any credible or convincing evidence to establish the validity of the adoption,' Judge Deshmukh said.
The civil court dismissed the petition for two reasons. Firstly, he noted that the biological parents were opposed to the adoption of the child, and second, the adoption certificate was not registered under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Law (HAMA).
However, Judge Deshmukh noted that the order could not be upheld and therefore ordered the civil court to rule on the adoptive parents' application within six months. "Based on the fact that the child has been with the adoptive parents for two years from the time he was two days old, the child must stay with the adoptive parents until a final decision is made," Judge Deshmukh said.
