A JURISPRUDENTIAL EXEGESIS OF INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION INTHE REPUBLIC OF INDIA: A CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL DISCOURSE UPONSEMINAL JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS

META DESCRIPTION
This scholarly disquisition undertakes a comprehensive jurisprudential analysis of the
evolving legal landscape of intercountry adoption in India, particularly emphasizing the
transformative influence of seminal judicial pronouncements on the intertwined principles of
child welfare and legal compliance. The discourse meticulously examines six pivotal legal
precedents that have fundamentally reshaped the normative framework governing
transnational adoptions, commencing with the initial judicial recognition of intercountry
adoption in In Re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta (1982) ¹ and culminating in more recent
adjudications addressing both procedural rigor and the intricate complexities of international
legal instruments. The establishment of the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) as
a direct consequence of the Laxmi Kant Pandey litigation 1 n underscores a demonstrable
commitment to safeguarding children’s fundamental rights within prevailing socio-economic
exigencies. This analysis elucidates a discernible paradigm shift towards judicial activism,
wherein the courts proactively shape social policy designed to protect vulnerable children.
Furthermore, it underscores the increasing integration of international legal standards,
particularly those articulated in the Hague Convention, into domestic adoption practices.
Notwithstanding these significant advancements, persistent challenges, including
bureaucratic impediments and the potential for exploitation, necessitate continuous vigilance
on the part of regulatory authorities. The findings herein advocate for enhanced transparent.

1. and heightened public awareness within adoption processes, ensuring every child has access
2. to a nurturing and supportive familial environment.
3. Keywords: Intercountry Adoption, Judicial Pronouncements, Child Welfare, Central
4. Adoption Resource Authority (CARA), Judicial Activism, International Standards, Legal
5. Framework.

INTRODUCTION
Within the intricate Artistry of global child welfare, intercountry adoption has ascended to
notable prominence, with India emerging as a focal point for this intricate practice over the
preceding decades. The judicial exegesis of intercountry adoption within the Indian context
has undergone a profound metamorphosis, sculpted by a series of landmark judgments that
have indelibly shaped the legal edifice governing this profoundly sensitive domain. This
scholarly discourse undertakes a meticulous and critical analysis of six pivotal judicial
pronouncements that have profoundly influenced the comprehension and execution of
intercountry adoption within India, elucidating their ramifications for the child’s welfare and
the imperative of legal conformity.

Genesis of intercountry adoption in India
It can be chronologically located following the Second World War, a time marked by
widespread displacement and orphanhood. In the ensuing decades, a confluence of socio-
economic factors, including but not limited to economic deprivation and unchecked
population growth, has engendered a situation wherein the abandonment of children has
become a recurrent phenomenon, thereby necessitating the establishment of a formalized and
regulated framework for adoption.
However, the lack of dedicated legislation explicitly addressing the intricacies of intercountry
adoption has resulted in a reliance on pre-existing legal instruments, notably the Hindu
Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA) of 1956 ² and the Guardians and Wards Act of
1890 ³ , both of which were primarily designed to govern domestic adoptions within the
confines of the Indian nation-state.
Despite this legislative lacuna, the judiciary in India has played a proactive role, exercising its
interpretative authority to adapt these existing laws to the novel challenges posed by
intercountry adoptions while steadfastly upholding the paramountcy of the child’s welfare.
This judicial activism has culminated in a series of landmark judgments that have, in effect,
laid down the foundational principles and procedural guidelines for intercountry adoption in
India.
An Exegesis on Seminal Judicial Pronouncements About Transnational Adoptions in
the Indian Context
A series of landmark judgments that have addressed various facets of this complex issue have
significantly shaped the legal framework governing transnational adoptions in India. These
judicial pronouncements have clarified the legal validity of intercountry adoptions and
underscored the paramount importance of safeguarding the welfare of children involved in
such processes.

1. In Re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta (1982) For Recognition of Transnational Adoption
   The Gujarat High Court’s decision in In Re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta is a pioneering
   judgment that explicitly acknowledged the legal validity of transnational adoptions within the
   Indian legal framework. Before this ruling, the legal status of intercountry adoptions
   remained ambiguous, leading to uncertainties and challenges for prospective adoptive parents
   and children alike. The court’s 4 interpretation of Section 9(4) of the Hindu Adoptions and
   Maintenance Act (HAMA) as encompassing intercountry adoptions paved the way for the
   recognition and regulation of this practice. This landmark judgment was a foundational
   precedent for subsequent judicial interpretations and legislative developments in transnational
   adoption. ⁵
2. Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India (1984) in Genesis of the Central Adoption
   Resource Authority (CARA)
   The Supreme Court’s intervention in Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India (1984) marked
   a watershed moment in the evolution of intercountry adoption law in India. Prompted by
   concerns regarding malpractices and exploitation in the adoption process, the court issued
   directives for establishing a regulatory body to oversee and streamline intercountry adoptions.
   This led to the creation of the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) in 1989,
   which has since been pivotal in ensuring intercountry adoptions’ ethical and legal conduct.
   The court’s emphasis on the need for stringent safeguards to protect the welfare of children
   underscored the gravity of the adoption process and its potential implications for children’s
   lives. ⁶
3. Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India (1987) in Reaffirming the Primacy of Child
   Welfare
   In a subsequent ruling in Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India (1987), the Supreme Court
   reiterated its unwavering commitment to safeguarding the rights and being pivotal to the
   well-being of children involved in intercountry adoptions. The court emphasised that the
   child’s best interests must be the paramount consideration in any adoption proceeding and
   that procedural safeguards must be in place to prevent exploitation and ensure that adoptions
   are conducted ethically and transparently. This judgment further solidified CARA’s role as
   the central authority overseeing intercountry adoptions and ensuring compliance with
   domestic and international legal norms. ⁷
4. Jay Kevin Salerno v. State (1988) in Guardianship and Custody in Private Care
   Homes
   The Bombay High Court’s decision in Jay Kevin Salerno v. State (1988) addressed the
   critical issue of guardianship and custody of children residing in private care homes while
   awaiting adoption. The court held that institutions entrusted with the care of such children
   must adhere to the legal framework governing adoption and ensure that all procedures are
   conducted according to the law. This ruling reinforced the importance of transparency and
   accountability in the adoption process, particularly regarding the role of private organizations
   involved in child welfare and adoption services. ⁸
5. Karnataka High Court on Inter-Country Relative Adoption (2024) for Navigating
   International Legal Complexities
   A recent judgment by the Karnataka High Court in a case involving intercountry relative
   adoption highlights the evolving legal landscape surrounding transnational adoptions. The
   court directed a couple seeking to adopt a relative from another country to obtain the
   necessary certificates and approvals from the receiving country before proceeding with the
   adoption in India. This ruling reflects a growing emphasis on adherence to international legal
   conventions and procedures, ensuring that intercountry adoptions are conducted legally and
   ethically. ⁹
6. Debratti Nandee v. CEO CARA (2024) in Procedural Rigor in Intra- and Inter-
   Country Adoptions
   The case of Debratti Nandee v. CEO CARA (2024) underscored the importance of
   procedural compliance in intra-country and intercountry adoptions. The court held that all
   regulatory requirements and procedures must be strictly followed before an adoption can be
   finalised, regardless of whether the child is placed in India or abroad. This ruling reaffirmed
   CARA’s authority to oversee all aspects of the adoption process and ensure adherence to
   domestic and international legal obligations. ¹⁰
   

An Exegesis of India’s Jurisprudential Metamorphosis in Intercountry Adoption
When juxtaposed and critically examined, the aforementioned judicial pronouncements
reveal a profound and nuanced transformation in India’s philosophical and procedural
approach to intercountry adoption. These pronouncements are not merely legal edicts but
rather serve as a testament to the burgeoning cognizance within the Indian judiciary of the
paramountcy of children’s rights and their holistic well-being. Furthermore, they underscore
an unwavering commitment to harmonizing domestic adoption practices with the prevailing
international standards, ensuring that India’s legal framework is congruent with the global
best practices in child protection.

Judicial Activism as a Catalyst for Child Welfare
The proactive and interventionist stance adopted by the Indian courts in these cases
exemplifies a paradigm shift towards judicial activism, wherein the judiciary transcends its
traditional role as a mere interpreter of the law and actively engages in shaping social policy,
particularly in areas concerning the protection of vulnerable segments of society, such as
children in need of permanent familial placements. By promulgating comprehensive
guidelines and robust regulatory frameworks through landmark judgments, the courts have
effectively addressed the lacunae in the existing legislative landscape, which had hitherto
impeded intercountry adoptions’ smooth and ethical facilitation.
Ensuring Conformity with International Legal Instruments
A meticulous analysis of these judgments reveals a discernible trend towards incorporating
and assimilating international conventions and treaties into the domestic legal framework.
This is particularly evident in adherence to the Hague Convention on Protection ofChildren and Cooperation ¹¹ in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption, which serves as the
global touchstone for intercountry adoption practices. These rulings unequivocally emphasise
that intercountry adoptions must not only align with the extant Indian laws but also be
meticulously aligned with the global best practices enshrined in the Hague Convention,
thereby ensuring that the rights and welfare of the child remain the cynosure of all adoption
proceedings.
As mentioned earlier, the judgments collectively represent a watershed moment in India’s
approach to intercountry adoption. They herald an era of heightened judicial sensitivity
towards the child’s rights and a firm resolve to integrate international standards into domestic
legal practices. This jurisprudential metamorphosis is poised to have far-reaching
ramifications for the future of intercountry adoption in India, ensuring that the process is
conducted with utmost transparency, accountability, and an unwavering commitment to the
child’s best interests.
Challenges and wins in Intercountry Adoption in India
The judicial landscape surrounding intercountry adoption in India has undergone a
metamorphosis, marked by landmark decisions prioritising the welfare of children while
navigating complex legal and ethical terrain. These rulings have established a framework that
ensures compliance with domestic laws and international standards, embodying a steadfast
commitment to protecting the most vulnerable members of society.
However, despite these advancements, significant hurdles persist in effectively implementing
these judicial directives. Bureaucratic delays, a lack of public awareness regarding legal
processes, and the ever-present threat of exploitation by unscrupulous agencies continue to
pose formidable challenges, jeopardising the well-being of children awaiting adoption.
As India grapples with socio-economic challenges that impact child welfare, it becomes
imperative for courts and regulatory bodies like the Central Adoption Resource Authority
(CARA) to remain vigilant in enforcing these guidelines while adapting to the ever-evolving
circumstances. Future reforms should prioritise enhancing transparency within adoption
processes, fostering a deeper understanding of legal rights among the populace, and strengthening collaboration between governmental agencies and non-profit organizations dedicated to child welfare.
Through sustained judicial oversight and legislative support, India has the potential to
solidify its framework for intercountry adoption further, ultimately ensuring that every child
finds a loving and nurturing family environment.

Conclusion
In summation, the jurisprudential trajectory of intercountry adoption within the Indian legal
framework evinces a substantial metamorphosis catalyzed by seminal judicial
pronouncements prioritizing the paramountcy of child welfare. The judiciary’s proactive
engagement has resolved legal ambiguities and established a robust framework harmonizing
domestic practices with international instruments, notably the Hague Convention.
Notwithstanding considerable progress, persistent challenges, including bureaucratic
impediments and the potential for exploitation, necessitate sustained vigilance by regulatory
authorities such as CARA. Future reforms must emphasize enhanced transparency and public
awareness campaigns to safeguard vulnerable children’s rights. As India navigates this
intricate domain, unwavering adherence to ethical adoption protocols and an unyielding focus
on the child’s best interests remain paramount. Ultimately, this evolving legal architecture
aspires to ensure every child in need finds a nurturing familial environment, reinforcing
India’s commitment to child welfare and protection.

REFERENCES

1. In re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta, AIR 1982 Guj 100.
2. Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption, opened
   for signature May 29, 1993
3. Guardians and Wards Act, No. 8 of 1890, Acts of Parliament (1890)
4. In re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta, AIR 1982 Guj 100
5. Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, No. 78 of 1956, § 9(4) (India)
6. Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 469
7. Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 232
8. Jay Kevin Salerno v. State, AIR 1988 Bom 245.
9. U. Ajay Kumar v. Union of India, Writ Petition No. 16681 of 2023 (Karnataka High Court Jan. 23, 2024)
10. Debratti Nandee v. CEO CARA, 2024