Bombay High Court Mandates CARA Issue Adoption NOC For Expatriate Parents Under Hindu Law

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay has delivered a significant ruling concerning the adoption of children under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA). In a petition filed by an expatriate couple, the court directed the Central Adoption Regulatory Authority (CARA) to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to facilitate the relocation of their adopted daughter to Australia.

Case Background

The petitioners, a married couple who are Indian-born and later acquired Australian citizenship, adopted a minor girl child from a close relative in India. The adoption was solemnized through Hindu religious rites and subsequently registered with the Joint Sub-Registrar in Thane. Despite the legality of the adoption under personal law, the couple faced systemic hurdles when trying to secure an NOC from CARA—a requirement for the child's visa and permanent residency in Australia. CARA had initially resisted, citing concerns about jurisdiction and the applicability of the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption.

Legal Conflict and Arguments

CARA contended that because the adoptive father is an Australian citizen, the adoption constitutes an "inter-country adoption," thus requiring strict adherence to the 2022 Adoption Regulations and the Hague Convention framework. They argued that in the absence of specialized permissions from the receiving country (Australia), they could not process or regularize the adoption.

Conversely, the petitioners argued that their case did not fall under the strictures of the Hague Convention. They provided communication from Australian authorities, which explicitly termed the matter an "expatriate adoption" rather than a formal inter-country adoption facilitated under the Convention. They maintained that the procedural insistence on prior permission from the foreign government rendered the statutory rights of the child and parents redundant.

Judicial Analysis and Precedents

The bench, comprising Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Abhay J. Mantri, observed that while the 2022 Adoption Regulations are generally applicable, the peculiar nature of "expatriate adoptions" within a family unit requires a practical, child-centric approach. The court referenced the Supreme Court's stance in Prema Gopal vs. Central Adoption Regulatory Authority , noting that when an adoption is valid under HAMA, the administrative authority should not create hurdles that impede the child's right to family life.

The High Court clarified that once a District Magistrate verifies the validity of the Adoption Deed, the role of CARA is to issue an NOC under the framework of Section 60 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, ensuring the child can safely relocate with their adoptive parents.

Key Observations

  • "ADOPTING ONE CHILD WILL NOT CHANGE THE WORLD: BUT FOR THAT CHILD, THE WORLD WILL CHANGE"
  • "There is no provision either in the Juvenile Justice Act or the Adoption Regulations 2022, which defines Expatriate Adoption . Nevertheless, this adoption is legal under the provisions of HAMA ."
  • " Articles 5 and 17 of the Hague Convention would not apply in this case" due to the receiving country's classification of the arrangement as an expatriate adoption .

Final Court Order

The Court directed the petitioners to approach the District Magistrate, who must conduct a verification inquiry within 30 days. Upon receiving the verification certificate, CARA is mandated to issue the NOC within 15 days, with intimation sent to both Indian and Australian immigration authorities. This ruling provides a much-needed template for other expatriate families navigating the complexities of transitioning HAMA-registered adoptions into international recognition.