The consent of a biological father, who is a rape convict, is not required for the adoption of a child born to a minor rape victim, affirming the mother's right to give the child up for adoption.

ORDER :

Hemant Chandangoudar, J.

The petitioners are seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 11.11.2024 issued by Respondent No.1 rejecting the online Application bearing No. PRP-11112024-6359973 for the registration of the adoption deed dated 11.11.2024. The petitioners seek a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider their application for registering the Adoption Deed dated 11.11.2024.

2. Respondent No.1 has issued the impugned endorsement, stating that the application is incomplete as the biological father of the child to be adopted is not mentioned as an executing party. The primary issue raised in this petition is whether the consent of the biological father of a child born out of rape who is also the accused in the rape case is required, in addition to the consent already provided by the minor victim mother and her guardian, for the purpose of giving the child up for adoption.

3. Petitioner No.1 is a Muslim minor and the victim of rape, as well as the biological mother of the girl child, who was 51 days old at the time of filing this petition. Petitioner No.2 is the mother and legal guardian of Petitioner No.1. Petitioners No.3 and 4 are a Muslim married couple, and the prospective adoptive parents with no biological children, who have filed an affidavit affirming their educational qualifications, financial stability, and emotional commitment to provide for the overall growth and development of the child.

3.1 Respondent No.1 is the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar at Yelahanka, who issued the impugned endorsement. The biological father, who is the rape accused, is currently in judicial custody awaiting trial and has not been impleaded as a party in this writ petition.

4. It is undisputed that Petitioner No.1 is the minor victim in Crime No.0307/2024, registered on 03.08.2024 at the Devarajeevanahalli Police Station (later transferred to the Kadugondana Police Station under Crime No.379/2024, dated 13.08.2024). The case involves allegations of offences committed during the period between 01.11.2023 and 20.06.2024, punishable under Sections 4-6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and Sections 376, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

5. Petitioner No.1 gave birth to a baby girl on 30.09.2024 at Bowring and Curzon Hospital, Bangalore. Petitioners No.1 and 2 assert that they are in dire financial distress and are unable to provide basic necessities or ensure the overall development of the child. Additionally, Petitioner No.1 comes from an impoverished family consisting of three female members, with no male earning member. For these reasons, Petitioners No.1 and 2 are willing to give the child up for adoption.

6. Petitioners No.3 and 4, a married couple with no children, have expressed their willingness to adopt the child. Consequently, they have executed an Irrevocable Adoption Deed dated 11.11.2024 with Petitioners No.1 and 2.

7. However, Respondent No.1, through the impugned endorsement, rejected the application bearing No.PRP-11112024-6359973, dated 11.11.2024, seeking registration of the Adoption Deed. The rejection was on the ground that the biological father of the child had not been included as a consenting party in the Adoption Deed. Aggrieved by this rejection, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shabnam Hashmi Vs. Union of India and Ors, (2014) 4 SCC 1, has extended adoption rights to muslims. The Court observed at paragraph no. (13), as follows:

“13. The JJ Act, 2000, as amended, is an enabling legislation that gives a prospective parent the option of adopting an eligible child by following the procedure prescribed by the Act, the Rules and the CARA Guidelines, as notified under the Act. The Act does not mandate any compulsive action by any prospective parent leaving such person with the liberty of accessing the provisions of the Act, if he s