Right To Adopt Cannot Be Defeated By Procedural Delay: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a prospective adoptive parent cannot be deprived of the right to adopt merely because the child crosses the statutory age limit during pendency of court proceedings, particularly when the delay is attributable to the judicial process itself. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), allowing a civil revision petition, set aside an order of the District Judge, Nadia, which had rejected an adoption application under Section 11 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) on the ground that the boy—who was 13 years and 11 months old on the date of filing—had turned 16 by the time the order was pronounced.The trial court had dismissed the petition citing Section 10(iv) of HAMA, which bars adoption of a person who has completed 15 years of age. The High Court, however, held that the statutory bar could not apply in a situation where the adoption petition was filed well within time, and where it was the court's own procedural delay that pushed the minor past the age threshold. The petitioner, the Court observed, exercised his right diligently, and allowing that right to be extinguished without his fault would violate natural justice and adversely affect a fundamental right protected under Article 21.Referring to CARA guidelines—which determine age criteria based on the date of registration—and relying on the Bombay High Court's decision in In re Payal @ Sharinee Vinay Pathak, the Court reiterated that adoption laws must be construed in harmony with child-centric legislation and in line with welfare principles. Adoption, it emphasised, is not merely a statutory entitlement but a facet of the right to life, both for adoptive parents seeking to give meaning to their lives and for children needing care and protection.The High Court therefore held that the relevant date for determining the adoptability of the child was the date of filing the application, not the date on which the court eventually disposes of it. The petitioner cannot be penalized for a delay beyond his control. On that basis, the rejection order was set aside, and Misc (Adopt) Case No.27 of 2022 was restored. The trial court was directed to allow amendment of pleadings and to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within three months.Case: Jagannath Guha Vs Manju Guha (Paul) and AnrCase No: C.O. 3218 of 2024Click here to read order

Right To Adopt Cannot Be Defeated By Procedural Delay: Calcutta High Court

Srinjoy Das

Tags