SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 701

R.P.SETHI, SUJATA V.MANOHAR
Indian Council Social Welfare – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


( 1 ) HEARD both sides.

( 2 ) IN view of the investigations regarding allegations of malpractices relating to trafficking in children raised against two organisations in the Stateof A. P. , the four petitioners before us who are not connected in any way with those organisations are being prevented from proceeding with applications for guardianship Filed by them before the Family court/district court in respect of specific children in their custody. The petitioners also contend that even in respect of those children in their custody where after scrutiny a guardianship certificate has been issued by the Family court/district court concerned the child in question is not being allowed to be sent abroad to the guardian so appointed. This is on account of a letter dated 6/4/1999 issued by the secretary, Department of Women development, Child Welfare and Disabled Welfare, government of Andhra pradesh.

( 3 ) THERE are no allegations of any malpractice against the four petitioners. Under the revised guidelines for adoption of Indian children issued by the Ministry of Welfare, government of India known as the central Adoption Resource Agency, CARA Guidelines, (Chapter 3 para 3. 2.) the state






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top