Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Does Not Envisage Agreement To Adopt 'Unborn Child' in the Act of Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


D.D:15.6.2022

 

In a case involving the adoption of an unborn child, the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 does not contain a provision that would give effect to adoption of an unborn child.

 

The bench comprised of Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by the natural mother of a newborn baby boy to have him released from the custody of respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who had requested his adoption before he was even born.

 

After the birth of the child, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 abducted him, having allegedly coerced the petitioner-mother and her husband into signing a consent form.

The court noted that the petitioner is the child's biological mother and natural guardian. In addition, the adoption is invalid under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956. According to Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956, the court further noted that there is no registered document regarding the factum of adoption.

It is argued that the petitioner is the natural mother and natural guardian of the child, that there is no valid adoption in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (abbreviated "the Act"), and that there is no registered document pertaining to the adoption in accordance with Section 16 of the Act.

The validity of the fact that the petitioner is the baby boy's biological mother is not contested by the respondents, and there is no adoption agreement on file, the court added.

The court determined that the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 does not permit adoptions of unborn children. Consequently, respondents Nos. 4 and 5 cannot claim legal custody of the minor in question.

In light of the foregoing, the court granted the mother's writ petition and ordered the respondents to immediately transfer custody of the child to her.

Regarding the petitioner and her husband's adoption claim, it also granted respondent Nos. 4 and 5 permission to enforce any agreement they have against the petitioner and her husband in an appropriate court of law.

Pooja Rani

versus.

State of Punjab and Others

 

Latest Legal News