Supreme Court NEW DELHI: After a 12-year-old girl lost her mother, her US-based maternal aunt and her husband adopted her by performing ‘Datta Homam’ rituals under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA). That was two years ago. They have since struggled to take their adopted daughter to the US because of conflict between inter-country adoption frameworks of the US and India, leading Supreme Court to frown on India’s Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) coming in the way of a better future for children who have been adopted by their close relatives based overseas.The adoptive parents had completed the legal requirements for inter-country adoption of the child through a US govt agency but were told that a clearance in this regard would be needed from India’s CARA under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.While the US authorities informed the adoptive parents that the approval for adoption was valid till July 28, 2026, they came to know that children adopted under HAMA would not be recognised by the US as the Indian adoption procedure is not considered legally safe under the ‘Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoptions’.On the other hand, in cases involving inter-country relocation of a child, CARA’s office memorandum does not allow adoption procedure under JJ Act and Adoption Regulations, 2022, if a child is adopted under HAMA. CARA thus rejected the adoptive parents’ application for approval of adoption under JJ Act.The catch-22 situation being faced by the US-based couple was conveyed by advocates Noor Shegill and Anuja Pethia to a partial working-day bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi. Shergill said, “The adoptive parents are caught in a bilateral deadlock from which no administrative remedy provides an exit. India will not process the case through JJ Act, and the US will not issue a Hague Adoption Certificate for a HAMA adoption.”With the July-28 deadline drawing close, Shergill’s fervent pleas touched a chord as Justice Nagarathna came down heavily on CARA for not approving adoptions through HAMA. “This is all bureaucratic red tapism. If after inquiry the HAMA adoption is found to be in order, what is the problem in issuing no objection by CARA?” she wondered.Justice Nagarathna recalled another case in which the father’s sister wanted to take motherless twins to the UK, but all obstacles were put in her way. “We had to ask your officer to be present in court. Why do you adopt such an obstructionist approach when close relatives are adopting a motherless child?” she asked.“Why are you coming in the way of a child having a better future? Why are you taking a negative stand in the matter?” the bench asked and posted the matter for further hearing on July 14 with a directive: “In the meanwhile, requisite steps that are necessary for processing the application filed by petitioners shall be taken by the respondents without prejudice to their contention in this writ petition.”Get the latest India news and live updates. Download the TOI App.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosIndians Among 13 Killed In Explosion At Ras Laffan LNG Complex In QatarStudents Jump, Rescuers Breach Walls: Inside The Lucknow Fire Tragedy That Claimed 15 LivesTMC Civil War Escalates As Rebels Claim Control Of Party, Removes ‘Supremo’ Mamata BanerjeeNEET Re-Test Heartbreak: Students Cry Outside Centres After Missing Entry DeadlineWest Bengal’s First BJP Budget: 1 Lakh Jobs, DA Hike, New Airport, Cut In Minority Affairs FundsUP CM Yogi Vows Action, Dy CM Breaks Down After 15 Students Killed In Lucknow Fire TragedySix Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs Join Shinde Camp, Uddhav Suffers Fresh Political BlowUAE In Talks To Buy BrahMos Missile, Akashteer Air Defence System From India: ReportMahua’s ‘Rs 4 Crore Upfront’ Claim Sparks Defamation Threat; 20 Rebel TMC MPs To Sue Moitra | Watch84% Of Indians May Now Live In Urban Areas; India May Create A Third Settlement Category123PhotostoriesHeart disease in women: Most know it’s the #1 killer, yet miss THIS early warning sign“It was pressure, not pain”: The heart attack sign cardiologists never ignoreMeet Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah actor Amit Bhatt aka Champak Chacha’s real-life family; Here are lesser known facts about his wife Kruti Bhatt, kids and moreThis 18th-century fort overlooking Jaipur has legends, palaces and unmatched sunset views; no it’s not AmerRashmika Mandanna to Ananya Panday: 5 major fashion moments of the week that had everyone talkingAlways tired, forgetful or feeling pins and needles? Doctor says these silent symptoms could point to vitamin B12 deficiencyMaharashtra’s reverse waterfall to Ladakh’s magnetic hill: 5 Indian places that defy scienceWhat would you do? My closest friend keeps joking about my weight in front of everyone; Here’s what these 4 women did about itJanhvi to Shanaya: How the Kapoor clan brought wedding fashion goals to Anshula Kapoor’s pre-wedding festivityCan a child’s favourite drink increase the risk of obesity and high blood pressure? doctor explains123Hot PicksCGBSE NMMSE result 2026Gold rate todayIndia-US trade dealGorakhpur rapeAfrican proverb of the dayBest proverbWeather forecast tomorrowPortuguese proverb of the daySpanish proverb of the dayTop TrendingDelhi MurderUS-Iran WarBadlapur AccidentFIFA World Cup 2026Shiv Sena UBTTamil Nadu Ammonia Gas LeakNEET UG ExamGold rate todayDelhi weatherMumbai rain
NEW DELHI: After a 12-year-old girl lost her mother, her US-based maternal aunt and her husband adopted her by performing ‘Datta Homam’ rituals under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA). That was two years ago. They have since struggled to take their adopted daughter to the US because of conflict between inter-country adoption frameworks of the US and India, leading Supreme Court to frown on India’s Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) coming in the way of a better future for children who have been adopted by their close relatives based overseas.The adoptive parents had completed the legal requirements for inter-country adoption of the child through a US govt agency but were told that a clearance in this regard would be needed from India’s CARA under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.While the US authorities informed the adoptive parents that the approval for adoption was valid till July 28, 2026, they came to know that children adopted under HAMA would not be recognised by the US as the Indian adoption procedure is not considered legally safe under the ‘Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoptions’.On the other hand, in cases involving inter-country relocation of a child, CARA’s office memorandum does not allow adoption procedure under JJ Act and Adoption Regulations, 2022, if a child is adopted under HAMA. CARA thus rejected the adoptive parents’ application for approval of adoption under JJ Act.The catch-22 situation being faced by the US-based couple was conveyed by advocates Noor Shegill and Anuja Pethia to a partial working-day bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi. Shergill said, “The adoptive parents are caught in a bilateral deadlock from which no administrative remedy provides an exit. India will not process the case through JJ Act, and the US will not issue a Hague Adoption Certificate for a HAMA adoption.”With the July-28 deadline drawing close, Shergill’s fervent pleas touched a chord as Justice Nagarathna came down heavily on CARA for not approving adoptions through HAMA. “This is all bureaucratic red tapism. If after inquiry the HAMA adoption is found to be in order, what is the problem in issuing no objection by CARA?” she wondered.Justice Nagarathna recalled another case in which the father’s sister wanted to take motherless twins to the UK, but all obstacles were put in her way. “We had to ask your officer to be present in court. Why do you adopt such an obstructionist approach when close relatives are adopting a motherless child?” she asked.“Why are you coming in the way of a child having a better future? Why are you taking a negative stand in the matter?” the bench asked and posted the matter for further hearing on July 14 with a directive: “In the meanwhile, requisite steps that are necessary for processing the application filed by petitioners shall be taken by the respondents without prejudice to their contention in this writ petition.”
