Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Child’s Welfare Paramount,” Bombay High Court Annuls Adoption Order After Failed Parent-Child Bonding

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 In a landmark judgment, the Bombay High Court, under Justice R.I. Chagla, annulled an adoption order, underscoring the overriding importance of a child’s welfare in adoption cases. The case involved the Bal Asha Trust of Mumbai petitioning against the adoption by Ashu Singhal and Riddhi Singhal, due to significant bonding and care issues with the adopted child.

This judgment pivoted on the legal principle that the best interest and welfare of the child are of utmost importance in adoption cases. It addressed the rare scenario of annulling an adoption due to the failure of establishing a parental bond.

After adopting a male minor child on August 17, 2023, the Singhal couple faced challenges in bonding with the child and managing his behavioral and health issues. This led to their request for annulling the adoption, a situation the court had to carefully assess in light of the child’s welfare.

Justice Chagla pointedly observed, “The welfare of the child is of paramount importance.” The Court meticulously reviewed counseling reports, the petitioner’s affidavit, and the scrutiny officer’s findings. It noted the inability of the adoptive parents to emotionally connect with the child and manage his health concerns, despite efforts and guidance from the adoption agency.

The judgment was grounded in the principles of the Adoption Regulations. It emphasized the child’s welfare as the central concern, aligning with the guidelines of CARA in adoption matters.

The Court decided to annul the previous adoption order, directing CARA to list the child as ‘Free for Adoption’ again. It also ordered the return of a financial investment made by the adoptive parents for the child’s benefit, as per the earlier court directive.

Date of Decision: January 25, 2024

Bal Asha Trust, Mumbai Vs. Ashu Singhal & Anr.

 

Latest Legal News