The court ruled that adoption should be allowed despite the parents' ineligibility under Regulation 5(8) due to the child's best interest and established emotional ties.

JUDGMENT :

R.K.PATTANAIK, J.

1. Instant revision in terms of Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is at the behest of the petitioners assailing the correctness, legality and judicial propriety of the impugned order dated 19^th December, 2017 under Annexure-1 passed in connection with C.M.A. No.39 of 2017 by the learned District Judge, Kendrapara, whereby, an application under Section 58 (3) thereof filed by them and the opposite party seeking adoption order of a minor child was dismissed on the grounds inter alia that the same is not sustainable in law and therefore, deserves to be interfered with and set aside in the interest of justice.

2. The petitioners at the Prospective Adoptive Parents (PAPs) before the learned Court below, whereas, the opposite party is a recognized Specialized Adoptive Agency under Section 65 of the Act for Rehabilitation of orphan, abandoned and surrendered children through the process of adoption.

3. The petitioners are related as husband and wife and permanent resident of Kendrapara. It is pleaded that petitioner No.1 is a service holder and petitioner No.2 is a home maker and have movable and immovable assets and they in order to adopt a child registered themselves with Child Adoption Resource Information and Guidance System ( in short ‘CARINGS’), an online system to facilitate, guide and monitor adoption programmes under the Central Adoption Resource Authority (briefly as ‘CARA’), which is a statutory body of Ministry of Women and Child Development Department, Government of India.

4. A minor child (the name withheld) reported to be born on 8th January, 2017 was declared legally free for adoption by the Child Welfare Committee, Kendrapara with the issuance of a certificate under Section 38 of the Act and registration in CARINGS vide No. OR-19 SAA-0106 for the purpose of adoption under Section 56 thereof.

5. As pleaded on record, the authority concerned conducted an inquiry with a Home Study Report (HSR) vis-à-vis the petitioners which disclosed about their information, such as, home and neighbourhood, standard of living, social and family background, education, occupation, marital relationship, attitude and motivation for adoption and possible rehabilitation plan for the child and after being satisfied, they were found eligible to adopt a child and in the meanwhile, since the minor child was declared legally free for adoption, the profile of the child was referred to the petitioners, who, thereafter, accepted the same on 11^th August, 2017 by signing the Child Study Report (CSR) and Medical Examination Report (MER) and after completion of all the formalities, the adoptive child was handed over to them on the basis of a Pre-adoption Foster Care being executed as required in view of Regulation 11(1) of the Adoption Regulations, 2017 with an undertaking for them to allow the authorized Social Worker to visit their home to follow up the post-adoption process; ascertain the progress and well being of the child. In fact, it is pleaded on record that the adoptive child has been handed over to the petitioners on 11^th August, 2017 with the pre-adoption formalities complied with. As per the requirement of Section 58 (3) of the Act since an adoption order is required, both the parties approached the learned Court below with CMA No. 39 of 2017 being filed. Upon receiving the application, learned Court below considered, whether, the institution can be permitted to deliver the minor child in adoption to the petitioners but reached at