2026 Supreme(Telangana) 68
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T.MADHAVI DEVI, J.
Muthineni Venakanna – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Women and Child Welfare Department and others – Respondents
W.P. No. 20162 of 2025
Decided On : 28-01-2026
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : RAPOLU BHASKAR
For the Respondent: GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE
Adoption must comply with legal procedures to prevent child trafficking; illegal adoptions violate the Juvenile Justice Act.
Headnote:(A) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 81 - Child trafficking - The petitioner challenged the detention of his adopted child, asserting his right to custody following illegal adoption procedures that violated the Act - The court emphasized that the adoption did not comply with CARA guidelines and highlighted the serious issue of child trafficking. (Paras 5, 6, 8)
(B) Adoption Procedures - This court cannot condone illegal adoptions due to the potential encouragement of child trafficking and must adhere strictly to statutory requirements. (Paras 6, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner and his wife sought to adopt a child after not having biological children. They informally adopted a child from a purported trafficker and faced criminal charges related to child trafficking. The child was taken into government custody based on allegations against the trafficker.
Findings of Court:
The court found that adoption was unlawful, stemming from a trafficking case, and could not be approved as it undermined the state’s adoption protocols.
Issues: The central issue was whether custody could be granted to the petitioner despite the illegal adoption process tied to child trafficking allegations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that adherence to proper legal procedures in adoption is essential to prevent and discourage child trafficking, referencing that the bond formed due to illegal adoption does not justify unlawful conduct.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenging child's custody. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel for petitioner argues for custody. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. child adoption contradicts legal guidelines. (Para 5) |
| 4. court emphasizes child trafficking prohibition. (Para 6) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed without relief. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
T.MADHAVI DEVI, J.
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 petiti