http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SUMANLAL CHHOTALAL KAMDAR ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: MISS ASHA TRILOKBHAI SHAH ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT09/05/1995

BENCH: SAHAI, R.M. (J) BENCH: SAHAI, R.M. (J) HANSARIA B.L. (J)

CITATION:  1995 AIR 1892            1995 SCC  (3) 700  JT 1995 (5)   165        1995 SCALE  (3)553

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:           THE 9TH DAY OF MAY, 1995 Present:           Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.M.Sahai           Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.L.Hansaria Mr. P.H. Parekh, Ms. Smrita Mishra, Mr. N.K.Sahoo, Advs. for the appellants. Mr. S.Ganesh, Mr. C.H.Patel, Ms. Reema Bhandari, Mr. M.N.Shroff, Mr. K.V.Sreekumar and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Advs. for the Respondents.           JUDGMENT The following Judgment of the Court was delivered:           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION           CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5403-04 OF 1995      [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos.3662-63 of 1989] Sumanlal Chhotalal Kamdar etc.             ..... Appellants           Versus Miss Asha Trilokbhai Shah etc.            ..... Respondents           JUDGMENT R.M. Sahai, J.      An important  question in  relation to  the adoption of infants from  orphanage or  ashrams by  foreign nationals is raised by  the appellants,  who claim  to be social workers. They  approached  the  High  Court,  invoked  its  appellate jurisdiction against the order passed by the District Judge, Rajkot, allowing  the application  filed by  Superintendent, Kathiawar Nirashrit Balashram as Power of Attorney holder of a Norwegian  couple under  Section 7  of the  Guardians  and Wards Act,  1890 and  appointing the Norwegian couple as the guardian of  the child  with certain conditions mentioned in the order.  By the  time the appeal came up for hearing, the law of adoption by foreign nationals was streamlined by this Court in  two decisions:  Lakshmi Kant  Pandey v.  Union  of India (1984)  2 SCR  795 and  Laxmi Kant  Pandey v. Union of India &  Anr. (1985)  Supp. 3  SCR 71.  The  learned  Single

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Judge, therefore,  after examining the conditions imposed by the District  Judge held  that the  guidelines laid  down by this Court  had been  scrupulously followed.  The order  was maintained in appeal as well.      The  guidelines  laid  down  by  the  Court  are  quite exhaustive. What is urged is that they are not being carried out either  in letter or spirit. It is, therefore, necessary to reiterate  the guidelines  laid down by this Court in the case of  Lakshmi Kant  Pandey (supra)  and further  make  it clear that  whenever an  application is filed for permission to adopt  a child  by a foreign national then the guidelines would be  strictly  adhered  to.  The  authority  permitting adoption should  explain to  the biological  parent  of  the child about  the nature  and effect  of the adoption and the possible permanent  loss  of  contact  from  the  child.  In absence of  a  finding  that  the  authorised  officer  took precaution to  explain the  effect of  adoption  it  may  be rendered infirm.  This is  demonstrated by the facts of this case as  the Superintendent,  as holder of Power of Attorney of  the  Norwegian  couple,  became  the  applicant  and  as Superintendent of  the Ashram  gave the  child in  adoption. That was  not proper.  It was the duty of the Superintendent to have  contacted the  mother and  the father, if they were known, and  to explain to them the effect of adoption unless they were  not available.  However, we do not interfere with the orders  passed by  the courts  below, but  as  indicated above, the  guidelines have  to  be  enforced  strictly,  as violation of  the same  may not  only  render  the  adoption infirm, but  may  lead  to  proceeding  against  the  person infringing the same.      The appeals  are thus  disposed of  by reiterating  the guidelines laid  down by  this Court  and stating  that  any violation of  these or  non-compliance may  lead to adoption being declared  invalid and  expose the persons concerned to strict action including prosecution.