Deputy Registrar Of Chits Competent To Act As Arbitrator And Issue Recovery Certificates; Not Limited To Registrar Alone: Telangana High Court Custody With Biological Mother Presumed Lawful; Writ Of Habeas Corpus Not A Remedy To Enforce Foreign Court’s Return Orders: Bombay High Court Ocular Testimony Of Victim Prevails Over Medical Evidence In Rape Cases If Found Credible: Allahabad High Court Condonation Of Delay Should Follow Justice-Oriented Liberal Approach, Unintentional Delay Shouldn't Block Justice: Calcutta High Court Digital Banking Fraud: Clicking Suspicious Links Constitutes Customer Negligence; Liability Cannot Be Fastened On Bank Without Forensic Evidence: Delhi High Court Vexatious Matrimonial Complaints Filed As Counterblast To Divorce Is Abuse Of Process; Allegations Against In-Laws Must Be Specific: Gujarat High Court Sale Deed Executed By Son During Father's Lifetime Based On Manipulated Records Is Void Ab Initio: Karnataka High Court Charge Sheet E-Filed After Court Hours Deemed Filed Next Day; Accused Entitled To Default Bail: Kerala High Court Landowners Can't Use Antedated Stamp Papers To Defeat Ceiling Limits; Section 22 Land Reforms Act Prevails Over Registration Act: Madras High Court Rajasthan High Court Orders Tehsildar To Personally Pay ₹2 Lakh Compensation For 53-Day Illegal Detention Despite Suspension Of Sentence Mere Existence Of Dargah Doesn't Grant Jurisdiction To Waqf Board; Statutory Survey Under Sections 4 & 5 Is Mandatory: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Sets Aside Interim Stay On Delhi Race Club Eviction; Says Courts Can't Halt Statutory Proceedings Without Recording Finding On Prima Facie Case

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