‘Medieval conservative concept of a family’: Bombay HC sets aside civil court order refusing to let single, working woman adopt

“The comparison done by the competent court between the biological mother being a housewife and the prospective adoptive mother (single parent) being a working lady reflects a mindset of the medieval conservative concepts of a family. When the statute recognises a single parent to be eligible for being an adoptive parent, the approach of the competent court defeats the very object of the statute,” Justice Godse observed.

The court went on to note, “Generally, a single parent is bound to be a working person, maybe with some rare exceptions. Thus, by no stretch of the imagination, a single parent can be held to be ineligible to be an adoptive parent on the ground that he/she is a working person.”

The application had challenged a March 2022 order passed by the district judge disallowing the applicant woman from adopting the child.

Advocates N S Shah and S S Patil submitted that the woman had complied with statutory requirements under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (JJ Act) and also the Adoption Regulations, 2022. Despite this, the district court rejected the woman’s plea, noting that the biological mother of the child, who is the sister of the applicant, is a housewife and therefore she could take better care of the child, whereas the adoptive woman as a single working mother would not be able to give personal attention.

The lawyers submitted that the observations of the district judge were contrary to a report submitted by the District Child Protection Unit and the pre-approval letter issued by the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA).

It was submitted that the reason recorded by the district judge for rejecting the application is “perverse and unjust” and therefore the impugned order be set aside and the woman be allowed to adopt the child.

“Thus, the reason given by the competent court is not only contrary to the provisions of the JJ Act but is also contrary to the recommendation made by the district child welfare officer and the assistant director of CARA. Even otherwise, the reason given by the competent court is unfounded and baseless,” the high court observed.

Justice Godse noted that Section 57 of the JJ Act provided eligibility criteria for a prospective parent and Section 57 (3) held a single or divorced person eligible for taking a child in adoption. Section 57 of the JJ Act provided that the prospective adoptive parent shall be physically fit, financially sound, mentally alert and highly motivated to adopt a child to provide a good upbringing to the child.

“The district judge has rejected the application on the erroneous ground that the prospective parent is a single woman and a divorcee,” the high court observed.

The bench also observed that the statutory compliances were done and nothing adverse to the same was recorded by the district judge. Moreover, it noted the reports had found the “prospective adoptive parent to be a fit parent to adopt the child”, therefore, the district judge has erroneously rejected the application by doing “guesswork”.

Allowing the adoption plea by the woman, the bench held, “The reason recorded by the competent court is unfounded, illegal, perverse, unjust and unacceptable.”