Back
TELANGANA HIGH COURT
T. Madhavi Devi, J.
Muthineni Venakanna – Petitioner
versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
W.P. No. 20162 of 2025
Decided on 28.1.2026
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate
For the Respondent: GP for Women Dev Child Welfare
IMPORTANT POINT
Detention of adopted child – Where adoption of child is not legal and is not in accordance with CARA guidelines, same cannot be approved by Court.
Headnote:
Constitution of India – Ariele 226 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 81 – Detention of adopted child – Petition seeking custody – It appears to be a clear case of child trafficking and case is under investigation – As adoption of child by petitioner and his wife is not legal and is not in accordance with CARA guidelines, same cannot be approved by this Court – Petitioner and his wife have taken good care of child, but procedure adopted by them for taking a child in adoption cannot be appreciated or approved – On the ground that a bond has already developed between child and petitioner and his wife, respondents cannot be directed to refer the matter to CARA to be taken out of turn and consider case of baby child for adoption to petitioner and his wife – That would amount to and would lead to prescription for illegal adoptions – Court not inclined to grant any relief to petitioner. (Paras 6, 7 and 8)
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the action of the respondents No.3 to 6 in detaining the custody of his adopted child by name Muthenine Sharanya, aged about two years, in the Child Protection Center and not handing over her custody to the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents No.4 to 7 to handover the petitioner’s adopted daughter for care and protection and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner got married to one Sravanthi in the year 2014, but they did not have any children out of their wedlock in spite of severe efforts. Therefore, the petitioner and his wife have approached the District Collector, Nalgonda, for adoption of an orphan girl, but the same has been pending for several years. In the meantime, the petitioner and his wife came to know through some persons that one Nakka Yadagiri has a girl child in his custody and that he is intending to give the said child to the needy people for adoption. Therefore, the petitioner and his wife approached him and the said person has given the one month old girl child in adoption to them and the petitioner and his wife have adopted the girl child in the month of May, 2023, by conducting Datha Homum and have been taking care of the child eversince with lot of love and affection and have named the child as Sharanya. It is stated that they have performed the cradle ceremony grandly and have been taking care of the child with love and affection and have been providing for the welfare of the child. It is stated that the child was very weak at the time of adoption, but with due care and protection provided by the petitioner and his wife, she has gained her health. It is stated that her first birthday ceremony was also celebrated grandly on 13.06.2024 in the presence of all the relatives and submitted that this demonstrates that proper care and affection is being provided to her. It is stated that on the complaint of some persons that children are being sold, the respondent No.9 has registered a case in Crime No.173/2025 for the offences under Section 143(4), 143(5) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act, Section 80 of Juvenile Justice Act-2015, Sections 81, 87 of JJ Act-2015, Section 88 of JJ Act, against the Nakka Yadagiri and others. It is submitted that respondent No.9 came to the petitioner’s house on 18.06.2025 and has forcibly taken the child from their custody and detained the child at the Child Welfare Committee i.e., Sri Shishu Sankshema Shakha at Nalgonda Town, Nalgonda, without giving any notice and without following due process of law. Thereafter, the names of the petitioner and his wife have also been included in the FIR as Accused Nos.18 and 19. It is stated that the petitioner and his wife have made several efforts to take custody of the child from the respondents No.5 to 8, as she was only two years old and has been suffering with huge mental agony and depression due to the lack of parents, but all their efforts have failed and therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions made in the writ affidavit and submitted that the petitioner and his wife have developed lot of love and affection for the child having taken very good care of the child since she was a month old and therefore, the child should be given in adoption to the petitioner and his wife as they were also economically sound position to take care of the child. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the photographs filed along with the writ petition to demonstrate that the child was taken good care of. He also submitted that after filing of the writ petition, on the advice of the counsel, the petitioner and his wife have also submitted an application before the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA), but there is a long queue for adoption and the petitioner
