CRAIG ALLEN COATES v.

STATE & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 7475 of 2010)

SEPTEMBER 8, 2010

[Markandey Katju and T.S. Thakur, JJ.] 2010(11) SCR 102

The following order of the Court was delivered

ORDER

Leave granted.

Heard Mr. Krishna Mani, Senior advocate and Mr. Mohindru Singh,  

advocate  for  the  petitioner  and  Mr.  Gopal  Subramaniam,  learned  

Solicitor General who has appeared as amicus curiae in this case,  

Ms. Coates who proposes to adopt the child Anil, has also appeared  

before us.

On the previous date, we had requested the learned Solicitor General  

of  India to get the matter examined by an expert committee as to  

whether the adoption of the child Anil by Ms. Coates would be in the  

interest  of  the  child.  Today,  a  report  has  been  submitted  by  the  

learned Solicitor General made by a committee of Medical experts  

constituted  at  the  instance  of  learned  Solicitor  General  and  

comprising Prof. (Dr.) Rajat Ray, Dr. Pearl Drego, Dr. Amit Sen and  

Dr. Roma Kumar. The report reads as follow:-

“A  medical  board  consisting  of  Prof.  (Dr.)  Rajat  Ray,  Dr.  Pearl  

Drego,  Dr.  Amit  Sen  and  Dr.  Roma  Kumar  constituted  on  the  

directions  of  your  goodself  met  in  the  Room No.  13,  VIP  Room,  

Private Ward Building, AIIMS on 6th September, 2010 at 11.00 AM to  

examine the minor child Anil  and Ms. Cynthia Ann Coates for the  

purpose of evaluating the petition for adoption vide reference letter  

No. G-702/SGI/2010 dated 31st August, 2010.

The board looked into the medical records of medical and mental  

state of the child Anil as presented in the reports of Medical officers  

of Medical Home for Children. Moolchand Hospital, VIMHNS as well  

as the psycho metric evaluation of the child from Dr. Roma Kumar on  

the 3rd September.

From  all  records  it  was  apparent  the  child  has  developmental  

delays and difficulties with respect  to learning and expressing and  

would require special care for learning needs. In the opinion of the  

board such a child will benefit from family based care and nurturance  

rather than institutional care.

The  board   went  through  the  adoption  home  studies  made  by  

Lutheran  Social  Services  Wisconsin,  USA  which  gave  a  detailed  

analysis of the adoptive parents and the family.

The  board  further  examined  Ms.  Coates,  her  intentions,  her  

professional experience and her proposed education of the child. She  

has had extended experience in home based nursing and in a respite  

home where  she  has  given  personal  care  to  patients  with  neuro-

muscular disorders, cognitive impairments and other handicaps. Her  

experience in home health and her sensitivity towards multicultural  

issues was evident in her interactions. She presented a clear vision  

of the family, school and community resources she needs to mobilize  

in  order  to  make  the  adoption  successful.  She  is  committed  to  

providing physical therapy, occupational therapy, speach therapy and  

special education to her adopted child.

From the records  available  to  the board  it  seems that  she has  

adequate  financial  and  emotional  resources  to  provide  for  the  

adopted  child.  The  board  also  viewed  the  recent  recorded  video  

made with the child's current setup where the child's interaction within  

the group was observed. The reciprocity in the relationship between  

Ms. Coates and the child became apparent during our interview.

Thus the board  is  of  the  opinion  that  the petitioners  should  be  

allowed to adopt the minor male child Anil.

(Prof. Rajat Ray)

Head, Deptt of Psychiatry, AIIMS.

(Dr. Pear Drego)

Psychotherapist and family Counselor (Dr. Amit Sen)

(Dr. Amit Sen)

Child Psychiatrist

(Dr. Roma Kumar)

Clinical Psychologist”

We are satisfied from the Report of the Medical Board, AIIMS that  

Ms. Coates would be a proper person, to whom the child Anil can be  

given in adoption.

In the result, we allow this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment  

passed by the High Court as also that passed by the District Judge  

refusing to grant the prayer made by Ms. Coates for adopting minor  

child Anil and direct that the formalities regarting adoption as per the  

procedure prescribed shall be completed before the District Judge III  

(West), Delhi, as expeditiously as possible.

We  further  direct  that  for  inter-country  adoptions  the  procedure  

followed heretofore could include a reference to an expert committee  

on  the  lines  constituted  in  the  present  case  to  ensure  that  inter  

country adoption are allowed only after full and proper satisfaction is  

recorded  by  all  the  agencies  including  a  committee  of  experts  

wherever  reference to such a committee is  considered necessary.  

We are told that Central Adoption Resources Agency (CARA) has the  

power to make references but no expert committee as such has been  

constituted of identified for that purpose. The our opinion, it would be  

appropriate  if  Central  Adoption  Resources  Agency  requests  the  

Director  All  India  Institute  of  Medical  Sciences  to  constitute  a  

committee of experts to be headed by Professor and Head of the  

Department of psychiatry, AIIMS.

CARA may have been similar expert committees constituted in other  

States also to facilitate references to them in regard to children who  

may be living at distant places from Delhi.

We disposed of this appeal on the above terms. No costs.