Begin typing your search...

    Madras HC orders 10-year-old girl be handed over to adoptive mother

    Taking note of a 10-year-old girl’s wish to be with both her biological and adoptive mothers, a division bench of the Madras High Court, which was hearing a rather tricky case involving two habeas corpus petitions filed by the two mothers seeking custody of the child, directed the authorities to hand her over to the adoptive mother, but permitted her biological parents to visit her on weekends.

    Madras HC orders 10-year-old girl be handed over to adoptive mother
    X
    Representative Image

    Chennai

    In 2012, S Saranya of Ammapet in Salem had given her daughter to her brother’s family for adoption when the child was only 3.5 months old. After her brother died, Saranya wanted to bring the child home, but the adoptive mother, Sathya, refused. Saranya lodged a complaint with the all-woman police station in Ammapet, which was referred to the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), Salem.

    The committee admitted the child to Government Lifeline Trust Reception Home in the district. Opposing this and seeking custody of the child, both Saranya and Sathya moved habeas corpus petitions on October 29.

    Through the mediation and conciliation centre, the division bench comprising Justice PN Prakash and Justice RN Manjula found out that the child loved both the mothers equally and wanted them to be together. Considering the legal aspects, the bench rejected Saranya’s contention and directed the child to be handed over to Sathya. However, considering the child’s wishes, the court said Saranya, her husband and children should have free access to the child during weekends.

    According to the judges, it was improper on the part of the police to have entertained Saranya’s complaint, conduct an enquiry, brand her as a child in need of care and protection, and keep her in a home, while the CWC erred in removing the girl from the adoptive mother’s custody based on the police complaint.

    “If Saranya was disputing the adoption, it was for her to seek redressal under the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890, or for seeking a declaration that the adoption is null and void,” the bench held.

    Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!

    Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!

    Click here for iOS

    Click here for Android

    migrator
    Next Story