This article on the fundamental right to adopt is written by Ahona Pal from Symbiosis Law School, Noida.
INTRODUCTION TO ADOPTION
Parenthood is one of the most important tags of an individual’s life. Every individual has the right to become a parent. Sometime, however, this experience is missed by couples, or, even single people, due to various factors, like biological infertility, economic constrains, limited time factors, etc. The route to Assisted Reproductive Techniques also has considerable wastage of time and money and an ordinary person may fail to afford it. Thus, came the process of adoption. Adoption is an institutionalised practise through which an individual belonging to one kinship group acquires new kinship ties that are socially and legally defined as equivalent to the congenital ties. The new kinship supersedes the old ones wholly or in part.
Adoption in India has been recognised for centuries, but being a part of the different personal laws, the adoption processes had no uniformity. Under the personal laws, adoption ranges from it treating an adopted child as own child to not recognising adoption of children at all. Only in Hindu law is the process of adoption of a ‘son’ is accepted as an alternative to fill the void in case of absence of natural heirs. Hindus were of the belief that a son was required for both material and spiritual welfare of the family and due to such a conception, adoption of a son was stood to be recognised in Hindu personal laws. In Bal Gangadhar Tilak v. Shrinivas Pandit, the Privy Council held that under Hindu law, adoption was a means by which not only the father’s name was carried forward, but it aided for the fulfilment of various religious rites and practices under Hindu law that mandated the involvement of a son. However, it has to be noted that traditionally under Hindu laws, adoption of a daughter was not legally recognised, though it was permissible under customary law, since only a son could take part in the religious rites and practises that are essential under the Hindu religion. Prior to the enactment of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, adoption of a daughter was almost unheard of.
Adoption is a wide topic which has been prevalent in India for centuries. We shall now see what other academicians have to say on the subject of Fundamental Right to Adoption in India.
Ashok A. Desai, J, (1998) said the right to have size of a family according to one’s own choice is comprehended within the concept of human dignity. Since the impugned provisions, namely, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Sec. 11(i) prevent such right, they are violative of the Constitutional guarantee.
S Parkar, J, (1999) was of the opinion that after legal adoption, there should be statutory provisions in law for monitoring and filing progress reports on the well-being of respective children. In situations that are detrimental to the interests of the child in question, there should be provisions to initiate appropriate action for the best interest of the child since our constitution protects the right of a child under Art. 14 and Art 21 of the Constitution.
- Sathasivam, C. J., was of the view that adoption has always been considered as a wonderful opportunity to provide a child with home and parents. It offers an excellent alternative to institutional care of destitute, abandoned and neglected child in an atmosphere of love, affection and understanding which only a family can provide and must be safeguarded like a fundamental right.
Siya Shruti, Dir., (2012) said while supporting Inter-Country adoption, it is necessary to bear in mind that the primary object of giving the child in adoption being the welfare of the people, great care has to be exercised in permitting the child to be given in adoption to foreign parents, lest the child may be neglected or abandoned by the adoptive parents in the foreign country or the adoptive parents may not be able provide to the child a life of moral and material security or the child may be subjected to moral and sexual abuse or forced labour or experimentation for medical or other research and may be placed in worse situation than that in his own country. The right to be adopted cannot prevail over the life to right and personal liberty; one legal right cannot defeat the whole realm of natural rights.
Elizabeth Barthelot, (2007) is of the view that inter-country adoption violates the fundamental rights of the biological parent and the adopted child to save the human right of couples who cannot have children.
ADOPTION UNDER HINDU LAW
The main legislation governing the adoption process under Hindu personal laws is the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA). The law brought about radical changes in the adoption process by giving women a right to adopt and be adopted, including giving rights to married women, widows and single women to adopt as well.
In HAMA, Sec. 6 provides that a valid adoption takes place when:
- A person who is adopting has the capacity and right to adopt.
- A person who gave up in adoption has the right to do so
- A person who is being adopted is capable of being taken in adoption and
- The adoption is made in compliance with the conditions supplied in the Act.
The section does not require the performance of any formal ceremonies for an adoption to be valid, the only requisite being the actual transfer of the child from the family of his birth parents to the family who adopts.
There are other conditions of a valid adoption as well given in Sec. 11 of the HAMA. These other requirements are as follows:
- In case of an adoption of a son, the adoptive parent must not have a Hindu son, a son’s son or a son’s son’s son living at the time of the adoption.
- In case of an adoption of a daughter, the adoptive parent must not have a Hindu daughter or son’s daughter living at the time of the adoption.
- In cases where a man adopts a daughter, or a woman adopts a son, a minimum age difference of 21 years has to be present between the adoptive parent and the child.
- The same child cannot be adopted simultaneously by two or more persons
WHO CAN ADOPT
Under the HAMA, Sec. 7 and Sec. 8 provides for the capacity to adopt for a Hindu male and Hindu female, respectively. Both men and women who are of sound mind and are major, i.e., above the age of 18 can take up a son or daughter in adoption. However, if they are married, then the consent of their respective spouses is mandatory, unless such spouse has renounced the world, ceased to be a Hindu, or has been declared of unsound mind by a court of competency. It has to be noted that in case of a man, if he has more than one wife surviving, then the consent of all the wives are required for him to be able to adopt a child legally.
WHO CAN GIVE IN ADOPTION
Sec. 9 of HAMA provides for those who are capable of giving up children in adoption. It says that no one except the father and the mother of the child has a right to give up the child in adoption and both of them have equal right of giving up the child in adoption. Since both the parents have equal right of giving a child up in adoption, if one of them wants to give the child up for adoption, the consent of the other has to be mandatorily taken, unless such spouse has renounced the world, ceased to be a Hindu, or has been declared of unsound mind by a court of competency. The right to adoption has been extended to the guardian of a child in case both the parents are dead, have renounced the world, have been declared of unsound mind by a court of competency, or if the parentage of the child is not known. However, before the guardian can give up the child in adoptin, or adopt the child himself, the Court will look into the welfare of the child, wishes of the child with respect to his age and understanding and that the guardian receives or pays no consideration. Payment or reward for such adoption.
WHO CAN BE ADOPTED
Capacity of a person who can be adopted under HAMA is provided in Sec. 10 of the Act. It provides that for being capable of being adopted, one has to be-
- A Hindu
- Not already adopted
- Unmarried, unless a custom or usage allows the adoption of married individuals
- Below the age of 15 years, unless there is a custom or usage that allows the contrary.
EFFECT OF ADOPTION
Adoption of a child from another family has several repercussions that are highlighted in Sec. 12 of the HAMA. The adoptive child is deemed to be the natural child of its adoptive parents from the date of adoption and all ties the child had with that of his natural family are considered severed and replaced with the ties of the adoptive family. However, the Act provides three exceptions to this rule, which are:
- The child cannot marry anyone whom he could not have had he been living in his birth family
- Any property of the adopted child vested in him before the adoption would remain his, but would come with the obligation to maintain his relatives in the family of his/her birth.
- The adopted child cannot divest anyone from any estate vested in him before the adoption.
The senior most wife of a male Hindu, with several wives who adopts, is regarded as the adoptive mother of the child and the other wives are regarded as step-mothers. In case of adoption by a widow, widower or unmarried male or female, the subsequent man or woman he/she marries is regarded as the stepparent of the adopted child.
In Sawan Ram, the Supreme Court had to decide whether the adopted child of a widow would be regarded as the child of the deceased husband so as to be his heir. The Court held that under Sec. 5(1), adoption to a Hindu was intended to cover cases where the child was adopted by one person and becomes the child of another also. Thus, if a widow adopts a son, the adoption would not be limited to the widow only, but would extend to the deceased husband of the widow as well. The Court also referred to Sec.12 of the Act to say that the adopted child severed all ties with his birth family to establish ties with his adopted family and as a married woman belonged to the family of her husband, the child adopted by her would also be a member of the family of the husband.
A valid adoption if taken place can neither be cancelled by the adoptive parents nor any other person nor the adopted child can renounce his/her adoptive status and return to the birth family.
ADOPTION UNDER MUSLIM LAW:
Muslim personal laws do not recognise the process of adoption. However, there are provisions for looking after orphans (kafala) and guardianship whereby a child in need can be taken care of. In fact, the religion enjoins Muslims to take care of orphans and safeguard their person and property. However, in such cases, the child or ward remains to be a part of his biological family only and does not become equivalent to the biological children of the person taking care of him. He does not have the legal status of an adoptive child that equates him as a biological member of the adoptive family and ends all ties from his biological family.
In a recent landmark judgment by the Apex Court, it was held that the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act,2000, shall supersede the personal laws and any Muslim couple wanting to adopt, can adopt under the provisions of the secular law. Though the court refused to make the right to adopt a fundamental right, it observed that till the uniform civil code comes into existence, the law of the land shall prevail over the personal laws. The Supreme Court ruled that any person can adopt a child under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 irrespective of religion he or she follows and even if the personal laws of the particular religion does not permit it. “The JJ Act 2000 is a secular law enabling any person, irrespective of the religion he professes, to take a child in adoption. It is akin to the Special Marriage Act 1954, which enables any person living in India to get married under that Act, irrespective of the religion he follows. Personal beliefs and faiths, though must be honoured, cannot dictate the operation of the provisions of an enabling statute,” said the bench headed by J. P. Sathasivam.
The judgement of the Supreme Court would be welcome by the childless couples of Muslim community who have the desire to adopt but are unable to due to legal and religious limitations. The Juvenile Justice Act enables Muslim couples to take up the secular route to enable themselves to undergo adoption.
ADOPTION UNDER CHRISTIAN AND PARSI LAWS:
The enactments that deal with Christian personal laws in India, make no mention of adoption. However, if a custom can be proved, there would be no bar to adoption. In Philips Alfred Marvin v. V. J. Gonsalves, the Court upheld the legal validity of an adoption undergone through the help of the Church despite the absence of any law or customs. The Court also held that adoption was recognised under Christian law and the adopted child had same rights as that of a natural child.
The Parsis whose personal laws are governed by the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 and Pt. III of Indian Succession Act, 1925, have no provision for adoption. However, a custom prevails among Parsis known as the palak where the widow of a childless Parsi can adopt a child after four days of her husband’s death so that certain religious ceremonies could be performed annually. This child acquires no property rights.
ADOPTION UNDER SECULAR LAW
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (J. J. Act) was adopted to aid the rehabilitation of orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children and the act recognises adoption as one of the ways to facilitate the rehabilitation of children. Sec. 41 of the J. J. Act provides for the process of adoption under secular laws. As discussed above, the court held that adoption under the J. J. Act would be deemed as a secular method of adoption which would not only provide childless couples of all religions respite from childlessness, but would also allow the adopted children to grow up in an healthy environment that every child deserves. The main object of adoption under this act is to provide for those children whose birth parents are incapable of taking care of them, especially those who are orphaned, abandoned and surrendered. The responsibility of such child are reserved with the Court and it may give them up in adoption by maintaining strict adherence to the guidelines and provisions specified by the State or Central Adoption Resource Authority and notified by the Central Government. The Court has to be satisfied with the investigation done on the background of these children to be able to give them up in adoption. The parental rights of the child’s biological parents would cease to exist upon clearance from the Child Welfare Committee established under Sec. 29 of the Act.
For the child to be eligible for adoption, the following criteria have to be met under Sec. 41(5):
- In case of an abandoned child, if two members of the Committee declare the child legally free for placement.
- In case of surrendered child, if the period two months for reconsideration by the parents is lapsed.
- In case of a child who can understand and express his consent, if his/her consent is obtained in this regard.
Sec. 41(6) of the J. J. Act also provides for certain criteria for the adoptive parents. It says a child maybe given up for adoption to people without considering their marital status or the number of existing biological sons or daughters. Childless couples are also given the right to adopt under this section.
The word “Court” in the Act refers to a civil court, which has jurisdiction in matters of adoption and guardianship and may include the court of District Judge, Family Court and City Civil Court. However, there has been several criticisms regarding the meaning of Courts in this regard. In the case of Manuel Theodore D’Souza, the Bombay High Court observed that the District Court or the High Court has the jurisdiction to deal with the question relating to adoption as this court normally deal with the disputes regarding custody, guardianship etc. of children.
The time within which an abandoned child, below 2 years of age maybe declared free for adoption is sixty days, and if he/she is above two years, the time extends to four months. If it is a surrendered child, 2 month time is to be given to biological parents for reconsideration after which the child will be declared free for adoption.
The Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) of India is vested with the responsibility to oversee all adoption in India and issues certain guidelines to facilitate the process of adoption uniformly throughout the country and to relieve prospective adoptive parents (PAPs) from having to go through tiring procedures at different adoptive agencies. The agency issues certain guidelines that are adhered to whenever an adoption takes place. Under this system, PAPs apply for adoption by uploading their details and wishes and a child free for adoption is allocated to them through governmental channels. Some guidelines issued by the agency are as follows:
- Clear and transparent procedure for registration of resident Indians and provision for uploading required documents online.
- PAPs have an option to select an adoption agency of their choice for conducting Home Study Report (HSR) and preferred State also.
- Home study Report of PAPs can be prepared by State Adoption Resource Authority (SARA) or District Child Protection Unit (DCPU) empanelled social worker.
- Seniority of PAPs would be maintained from the date of registration.
- The maximum combined age for married couple has been increased from 105 years to 110 years to encourage adoption of older children.
- Minimum 25 years age gap between the child and adoptive parents has been prescribed.
- More clarity in adoption of special needs children, older children and siblings. Older children and siblings would no more be considered as special needs children.
- All Specialised Adoption Agencies (SAAs) would be authorised to do In-country & Inter-country adoption.
- Inter-state adoptions made simpler to boost adoptions within the country; No permission of State Adoption Resource Agency (SARA) is required for domestic adoption from another State.
- NRIs would be treated at par with resident Indians in terms of priority regarding referral of a child.
- Greater clarity in the process and documentation for Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) and Foreign PAPs living in India.
- Adoption expenses for different category of PAPs prescribed.
- Authorised Foreign Adoption Agency (AFAA) would have a provision of renewal after a period of five years.
- All adoptions (in-country or inter-country) to proceed on Central Adoption Resource Information Guidance System (CARINGS), adoption outside CARINGS is strictly prohibited.
The CARA Guidelines and the new adoption process is being developed to bring about effective regulation for adoption of orphan, abandoned and surrendered children and more transparency and efficiency in the adoption system. With the new guidelines, it would become possible for PAPs to track the status of their application making the entire system more user friendly.
The issue of Inter-Country adoption was first raised after the Korean War when hundreds of children faced ostracization in Korean society for having being fathered by Americans. In this situation, several Americans stepped in and adopted many babies to provide protection and bring them up with the love and care every child deserves. India had always been regarded as a state that was inter-country adoption friendly. However, a report published by THE Mail (London) which revealed that hundreds of unwanted babies were being transported from the slums of Calcutta to the U.S.A. opened the eyes of all Indians to the horrors of Inter-Country adoption without any coherent rules. The paper also reported the death of Nathan, a two-month old baby who died of dehydration on arriving in New York. Based on these events a lawyer sent a letter to the Supreme Court which the Court treated as a petition and issued several guidelines pertaining to foreign adoptions in India. Thus, the petition of Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India AIR 1984 SC 469 came about. In this case, the Court issed the following guidelines:
- Only governmental recognised agencies should be entrusted with the task of scrutinising applications by foreign parents wishing to adopt Indian children.
- Antecedents of the application should be verified, viz., their family background, financial status, health, etc.
- Preferably, the child should be given for adoption before he or she completes the age of three, though there can be no hard and fast rule on this.
- A progress report of the child along with a recent photograph, quarterly during the first two years, and half yearly during the next three years, should be provided.
- The parents should either deposit or enter into a bond for a certain amount, to enable the child to be repatriated, if needed.
- The entire proceedings on the application should be confidential and as soon as the order is made on the application, the papers and documents should be sealed.
In view of difficulties faced by some agencies in implementing these measures, the Supreme Court in Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India AIR 1986 SC 272 again made certain clarifications and modifications, such as:
- The scrutinising agency appointed by the court is to be an expert body having experience in the area of child welfare. It should not in any manner be involved with placement of children for adoption.
- The agency engaged in placement of children for adoption should not readily assume that children, including cradle babies who are found abandoned are legally free for adoption. Such children must be produced before the Juvenile Court so that further enquiries can be made. In states, where there are no Children Acts in force, children should be referred to the Social Welfare Department for making further inquiries and tracing their parents and guardians. The procedure must be completed latest within three months. Until the report of the Juvenile Court or the Social Welfare Department declaring such children as destitute or abandoned, these children cannot be given in adoption.
- No court in a state shall entertain an application for the appointment of a foreigner as a guardian of a child who has been brought from another State if there is Social or child welfare agency in that other State which has been recognised for inter-country adoption by the Government of India.
- Where the child is handicapped one, the court dealing with an application for appointment of foreign parents as guardians, should not insist on the foreign parents or even one of them coming down to India for approving the child.
- Every effort must be made to give a child in adoption to Indian parents before considering the possibility of placing it in adoption with foreign parents.
The practical implementation of these amended guidelines also posed difficulties. Hence, the Supreme Court again in Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India AIR 1987 SC 232 issued some new directions in the matter of the procedure to be followed for adoption of children by Foreign and Indian parents. These directives to some extent modified the earlier ones. These are:
- Payment of some amount to the scrutinising agencies for their services;
- Formulation of some procedure for prevention of illegal trade of babies;
- Maintenance of a consolidated list of prospective Indian parents wishing to adopt;
- No notice to be published in regard to any adoption application whether it is for foreign adoption or adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
- The time required for processing of the adoption application to be reduced;
- The limit of reimbursement of expenses incurred by recognised placement agencies to be raised to Rs.6,000; and so on.
- Even while elaborate guidelines have been evolved by the Government in 1995, for regulating the adoption of children by parents out of the country, yet the procedural wrangles, including delays and technicalities, could dissuade and discourage even genuine couples from adopting abandoned, destitute children.
It has to be noted that India became a signatory to The Hague Apostille Convention on 2007, to facilitate ‘Inter-country Adoption.
COMPETENCY OF PARTIES TO ADOPT
We have discussed till now the competency wit regards to two laws, viz., HAMA and the J. J. Act. Whereas HAMA provides extensive criteria for parents to be eligible, J. J. Act leaves the eligibility test what the behest of CARA who decided which couples are eligible for adoption. This has created some extent of ease the adoption process. Having a set number of criteria for adoption inhibits the ease of adoption for prospective adoptive parents. Estimated 1lakh children are homeless and parentless in India who are in need of a home. In these dire circumstances putting a bar on one religious community to adopt just as their personal law does not allow them to, seems frivolous. Moreover, unmarried people, widows, divorcees, homosexuals also have a right to enjoy the joys that parenthood brings. Competency limits the scope of adoption which indirectly affects the process and frequency of adoption in India.
However, it must e remembered that competency has to be decided on an objective level. If competency is left to be decided by a certain agency, its biases and outlook are bound to be reflected in the selection of prospective adoptive parents. Moreover, if there are no rules to decide on competency, then there would be more risks to the lives of the children who are being adopted. A basic rule should be there to rule out all those who are incapable of taking care of the children. Adoption should only be undergone when the prospective adoptive parents are competent enough in their environment to take care of a child. There should be guidelines to make sure parents are healthy, mentally and physically, have substantial financial backing and family support, have benevolent intentions to adopt a child and are capable of supporting the child emotionally.
Thus, for the competency of parties to be efficient, we need to avoid the catch-22 situations. Competency rules should be objective and applicable through the length and breadth of the country. Tough competency rules should be avoided as it would negatively affect the interests of prospective adoptive parents and the prospective adoptive child alike. However, at the same time, competency should not be so lax that anyone and everyone, without any proper mechanism are allowed to adopt. Such would increase the risk of adoption of children for illegal and immoral purposes.
IS THERE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO ADOPT?
In the matter of adoption of Payal @ Sharinee Vinayak Pathak was a case which brought into the judicial sphere the question of adoption as a fundamental right. In this case, the petitioners already had a daughter and they assumed the guardianship of another surrendered baby girl of five months. The girl remained with them for 4 years after which the couple formally applied to adopt the child. The High Court of Bombay observed that adoption is a basic facet of right to life under Art. 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court held that the right to life is asserted parents and individuals, men and women seek to adopt to give meaning and fulfilment to their lives. Also, the right to life also protected the interests of children who are in need of special care and protection. Therefore, the court held that the embargo on adoption of same sex children by the HAMA would have to give way to statutory provisions in the J. J. Act that allowed the parents to adopt a child irrespective of the number and sex of their biological children.
As we have already seen in Philips Alfred Marvin v. V. J. Gonsalvesthe Court held an adoption through the church valid even in the absence of any customary law.
In all these cases, we see that the Court took the role of judicial activism and safeguarded the right of adoption as an inherent right implied in the right to life under Art. 21 of the Indian Constitution.
However, this stance changed with the recent decision in the case of Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India and Otrs.In the instance case, the question came up regarding the right of Muslim’s to adopt. The Court took a liberal view and awarded adoptive right to Muslims under the J. J. Act. It upheld the status of J. J. Act as a secular law of adoption in India and granted the right to adoption across all religious communities in India, irrespective of what their personal laws said. However, the Court rejected the stance that the right to adoption was a right envisaged under the right to life of Art. 21. The court stressed that it is for Parliament to meet the constitutional obligations of Article 44, that it is for future generations to craft a UCC once there is “a dissipation of conflicting thought processes… prevailing in the country”.
The Supreme Court tried to discharge the matter in this case by taking recourse to Art. 44 and the controversy behind a Uniform Civil Court. This decision came as a major blow against the right of adoptive parents and children eligible to be adopted alike.
However fair it maybe to grant the right of adoption the status of a fundamental right, we are unable to do so due to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Shabnam Hashmi case. The decision brought about a need to revise our adoption laws so that the joy of parenthood can be enjoyed by everyone. Every child in India should have the right to family and often the child adopted is too young at the time of adoption and does not know about biological parents.
Thus, in conclusion we can say, since the Supreme Court has expressly mentioned, the right to adopt is not a fundamental right in India. However, it strongly needs to be so since it would provide a respite to childless couples and parentless children. A nurturing home is essential for a child to grow into a healthy human being, mentally and psychologically. It becomes the responsibility of the Courts to make sure to adopt and to be adopted is a fundamental right for both children and parents so that countless orphans and childless parents get some form of respite. However, there must also be suitable and strict guidelines, rules and regulations to ensure that such an absolute right is not being misused as recent cases have shown us that many a times, adopted children are trafficked, sold or used for scientific experiments or for child pornography. A strong vigilance system should be put in place to carefully and consciously monitor the adopted child as well.
 Prof. Kusum, “Family Law Lectures: Family Law I,” 321(LexisNexis, New Delhi, 3rd Edition, 2011)
 (1915) 17 BOMLR 527
 Sandhya Alias Supriya Kulkarni & Another v. Union Of India & Another AIR 1998 Bom 228
 Supra note 4
 Siya Shruti, “Adoption Laws In India: Reviews And Recommendation Needed” available at https://SSRN-id2021003.pdf (last accessed on 01.02.2016 at 17:57)
 Elizabeth Barthelot, “Internation Adoption: Thoughts on the Human Right Issue”, 13, BHRLR, 152(2007)
 Supra note 1 at 324
 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 available at http://tcw.nic.in/Acts/Hindu%20adoption%20and%20Maintenance%20Act.pdf (last modified at 23rd December, 2013)
 Sawan Ram v. Kalawati AIR 1967 SC 1761
 Ibid note 6
 Sana Murtaza, “Adoption under Muslim Law”, available at http://sanamurtaza.blogspot.in/2014/02/adoption-under-muslim-law.html (last accessed on 01.02.2016 at 17:54)
 Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India and Otrs. AIR 2014 SC 1281
 Harish V. Nair, “Supreme Court Grants Adoption Rights to Muslims”, India Today, 20th February, 2014.
 Supra note 1 at 340
 AIR 1999 Ker 187
 Supra note 1 at 339
 Supra note 1 at 340
 AIR 2002(2) Bom CR224
Debaditya Roy , “Adoption Under Juvenile Justice Act: A Clarion Call To Secularism”, available at http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l327-Adoption-under-Juvenile-Justice-Act.html (last accessed on 01.02.2016 at 17:57)
 Divya Gandhi, “The Nowhere Children”, The Hindu, 31st October, 2015.
 Pronami Dutta, “Inter Country Adoption (ICA)” available at https://slsnoida.curiositylive.com/apps/the-library (last accessed on 01.02.2016 at 17:57)
 PTI, “New rules for adoption of children issued”, Live Mint, 28th July, 2015.
 Supra note 24
 Supra note 24
 O. O. C. J. Petition No. 31 of 2009, Judges Order No. 298 of 2009
 AIR 1999 Ker 187
 AIR 2014 SC 1281
 “Perils Of Restraint”, The Indian Express, 26th February, 2014