Correct Judgment in India Blocks Entitled PAP

Orphanages are often for temporary placements. Just because a child is there does not mean he is available for adoption or that the first person who desires to parent the child has the right to move the child or “adopt”.

“Rejecting the claim of a Muslim man that he had adopted a Hindu boy as his son, the Madras high court today directed him to handover the boy to his mother.

“There is no concept of adoption known to Muslim Law,” a division bench comprising Justices N Paul Vasantha Kumar and P Devadass said.

The court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by S Mala, mother of Giridharan.

“It is a well settled proposition of law that creating a relationship of parentage by adoption was unknown to Mohammedan law as it was forbidden by the Quran. Besides the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956 permitted adoption by a Hindu alone,” the judges said.

Mala, in her petition, submitted that she had left her son under the care of Shaik Dawood in a children’s home run by him and was paying for maintaining him in the home at Sangiliayandavarpuram in Tiruchi district.

Later when she had gone to the home to pick her son, she found Dawood had shifted her son to some other place and refused to give her son back. He also “threatened” her of dire consequence if she insisted on getting her son back, the petitioner said.

Mala said though she had filed a complaint to police no action was taken by them.

Dawood said Mala had given Giridharan to him for adoption. However, she denied that she had signed any such deed.”
High court directs Muslim man to return boy to his mother
[Times of India 1/24/12]

 

 

 

 

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Misuse of power is common in corruption cases. Will the children’s home be sanctioned? Were other children also moved without consent?