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

2014 Supreme(Mad) 3400

High Court of Judicature at Madras
S. TAMILVANAN, J.

Arjun Neelakantan & Another
Versus
----------
O.P. No. 335 of 2014
Decided on: 22-09-2014

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:T. Ramachandran, Advocate.

Headnote:

Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 - Section 41(6) - Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Section 6 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Legal status of a biological - Physical custody of minors – Jurisdiction - Have stated that they are residing in given address State IAE and they are represented by power of - On behalf of petitioners their power of attorney has filed this petition stating that she is a social attorney agent Indian Christian residing at Colony petitioners worker of Christ Faith Home for Children and seeking adoption of said children in favour of petitioners - Counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that petition has been filed under Section 41(6) of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 seeking adoption - On a perusal of petition it is brought to notice that both petitioners are represented by their power of attorney for taking child in adoption - However no one is giving children in adoption as per petition filed by power of attorney of petitioners – Held, It is not in dispute that State Government has not framed any Rules pursuant to Act - On aforesaid circumstances impleading State to ascertain views of State in giving child for adoption would be proper in view of Constitutional mandate enshrined under Article 39 (f) - State shall in particular direct its policy towards securing that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment – Similarly Constitutional guarantee given for life and personal liberty under Article 21 of Constitution shall also be safeguarded in following adoption procedure under Section 41(6) of Act and Rules - Child Home should also furnish details about child being given in adoption as to how child was brought to home and how long child is in Home and other relevant details required for adoption - Merely based on self-serving version of petitioners who are strangers to child relying on certain xerox copies and attested copies said to have been issued by authorities adoption could not be recognised by court in absence of impleading State as necessary party - Petitioners 1 and 2 are represented by their power of attorney however no one is representing child being given in adoption in O.P. Though parent of respective child are not available to give child in adoption in court view State shall be impleaded as respondent when child is not given in adoption by natural parent in order to safeguard and maintain Constitutional mandate since they are in need of proper safety and a secured life - As Indian child being taken in adoption by an Indian residing in a foreign country or a Foreign national in order to prevent any abuse against children in future State shall be impleaded as respondent – Order accordingly

Judgment :

1. The Original Petition has been filed under Section 41(6) of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (As amended by Act 33 of 2006) read with Clause 17 of the Letters Patent, seeking an order:

(a) that the petitioners be appointed as the adoptive parents of the person of the minors Muthumari, born on 03.05.2009 and Ashwini born on 19.03.2013;

(b) that the minors Muthumari and Ashwini be entitled to the legal status of a biological son and daughter with all the rights of succession and inheritance;

(c) that the petitioners be permitted to take physical custody of the minors Muthumari and Ashwini for being taken outside India, outside the jurisdiction of this Court for being adopted, brought up and maintained by them in their home town at P.O.Box.4473, Flat 2064, Building #2, La Rose De Sable, Crazy Signal, Doha, State of Qatar, UAE;

(d) that the minors may be accompanied by an escort to reach the petitioner's house at P.O.Box 4473, Flat 2064, Building #2, La Rose De Sable, Crazy Signal, Doha, State of Qatar, UAE.

2. The petitioners have stated that they are residing in the given address in Doha, State of Qatar, IAE and they are represented by power of attorney agent, Mrs.Sunitha Joe, wife of Rajesh Joe, Indian Christian, residing at No.3/91, Mettu Colony, Manapakkam, Chennai - 125. On behalf of the petitioners, their power of attorney has filed this petition, stating that she is a social worker of the Christ Faith Home for Children and seeking adoption of the said children in favour of the petitioners.

3. Mr.T.Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petition has been filed under Section 41(6) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (herein after referred to as the Act), seeking adoption. On a perusal of the petition, it is brought to the notice that both the petitioners are represented by their power of attorney for taking the child in adoption. However, no one is giving the children in adoption, as per the petition filed by the power of attorney of the petitioners.

4. The power of attorney of the petitioners has filed proof affidavit on behalf of the petitioners, stating that she was appointed as power of attorney by the petitioners on 16.12.2013. The specific and limited power of attorney for the adoption are marked respectively as Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that both the power of attorney deeds were signed before the Embassy of India, Doha, Qatar. In the evidence of P.W.1 available in the form of proof affidavit, it has been stated that she is the power of attorney of the petitioners and the documents, Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2 are specific power of attorney deeds appointed P.W.1, which would show that P.W.1 has been nominated by the petitioners, as their power of attorney for taking the children in adoption on behalf of the petitioners.

5. Ex.P.3 is an attested xerox copy of the Certificate of Registration of the Christ Faith Home for Children, Chennai. Ex.P.4 is the Certificate of Recognition given by the Social Welfare and Nutritious Meals Programme Department, Chennai. It shows that the certificate has been issued by the Department for three years from 31.12.2011. Ex.P.5 is the Certificate of the Central Adoption Resource Authority, dated 21.03.2014. It is also an attested xerox copy of a Notary Public, stating that No objection Certificate has been issued by the concerned authority for Muthumari, male child, whose Date of Birth is 03.05.2009 and Ashwini, a female child, her Date of Birth is stated as 19.03.2013.

6. A photocopy of the extract of marriage certificate, bearing serial number of marriage certificate, bearing serial number of marriage 67/2002, for the marriage between the first and second petitioner has been marked as Ex.P.7. Ex.P.8 is the original medical certificate and medical investigation report of the first petitioner, dated 09.05.2012. Ex.P.9 is the





























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 Back to top