The Bombay High Court has ruled that a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) cannot assume custody of a child who does not fall within the categories of an orphan, an abandoned child, or a child requiring care and protection under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Holding that the committee had acted outside the scope of its statutory powers, the Court ordered that the minor girl be immediately reunited with her adoptive parents.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta observed that the CWC’s jurisdiction is confined to children covered by the Juvenile Justice Act. Since the girl in the present case did not fit any of those classifications, the committee had no legal authority to intervene or remove her from the adoptive family.
“The action on the part of the CWC obtaining the custody of the child is illegal as the CWC is not competent to exercise the jurisdiction over the said child and thereby the action of the CWC is wrong and illegal,” the Bench held.
The case arose from a petition filed by a couple from Maharashtra’s Chandrapur district, who had taken a six-day-old infant in adoption from her biological parents in 2020. The biological parents, already raising three children, had voluntarily agreed to the adoption. A deed was executed under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and the child had since been living with the couple. She was later enrolled in school using her adoptive family’s details.
The controversy surfaced after an NGO representative visited the family’s home in May. Acting on the matter, the CWC declared the adoption invalid and initially removed the child from the couple’s custody. Although the committee subsequently returned the child after recognising the couple as “fit persons,” events took another turn on June 5.
According to the petition, when the couple appeared before the committee on that date, the child was quietly taken away while they were engaged in conversation. Thereafter, they were denied access to the girl, leading them to approach the High Court through a habeas corpus petition.
The Bench acknowledged that the adoption process itself suffered from legal shortcomings. It noted that merely notarising an adoption deed does not satisfy the requirements of a valid adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. It also observed that the statutory procedures prescribed under the Juvenile Justice Act and the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) framework had not been followed.
Even so, the Court found one aspect decisive: the biological parents personally appeared before the Bench and confirmed that they had willingly entrusted the child to the adoptive couple.
In these circumstances, the judges held that the child could not be described as abandoned, orphaned, or in need of care and protection under Section 2(14) of the Juvenile Justice Act. As a result, the CWC had no jurisdiction to retain custody or pass orders concerning the child.
Setting aside the committee’s orders dated May 27 and June 5, the High Court directed that the minor be restored to the custody of her adoptive parents without further delay.
