Punjab and Haryana high court's amicus curiae says 'forcible' adoption of boy illegal and void

CHANDIGARH: In a twist to the ongoing battle over adoption of a minor boy to a couple based in the United States under "pressure" of his grandparents after his father's death, the amicus curiae appointed by the Punjab and Haryana high court has submitted that the adoption was illegal and void. In his report to the high court on Tuesday, advocate Anil Malhotra, who was chosen as the amicus curiae also suggested that a case under Section 361 (kidnapping) of IPC be filed in this matter.
The matter had reached the high court in January this year after a Chandigarh-based woman (name withheld to protect identity) filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that her minor son had been forcibly taken away from her custody through "forceful" adoption by her in-laws after her husband's death. She said her father in law and mother in law had called her to Patiala in September 2019 and forced her to sign some documents after which her son was given in adoption to the USA-based couple. She approached the HC after the Chandigarh police failed to take any action on her complaint.
She also claimed that her son's adoption was illegal because the adoption ceremony had taken place in the absence of adoptive parents and the child was taken away from her by the relatives of the adoptive parents, not the adoptive parents themselves.
Interestingly, the matter was pending before the HC since January and was heard by six judges of the high court but no action was taken until August 19, when Justice Amol Rattan Singh ordered appointment of advocate Anil Malhotra as amicus to assist the court in the matter. After the amicus submitted his report on Tuesday, the opponent parties have been told to submit their replies and the next hearing of the case is listed for Wednesday.
The amicus curiae in his report concluded that the alleged adoption of child is illegal and void and in complete contravention of the provisions mentioned in the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA). According to his report, no giving and taking ceremony took place between the natural mother and the adoptive parents, which is also against the statutory provisions. He also submitted that since the adoption is void, the custody of the child should be restored to the mother.
Regarding maintainability of habeas corpus petition in such issues, the amicus submitted that since the adoption was void ab initio, the HC being custodian and well-wisher of the minor child can restore his custody to his mother, who is the natural guardian. The mother need not to go to the lower court for the custody of her son and in the present circumstances, the HC is empowered to restore the child's custody to her. During the hearing of the case on Tuesday, the counsel for the adoptive parents informed the HC that they are not US citizens but have a long-term USA visa.
In this case, the petitioner was married in 2017 in Patiala and within a short period of her marriage she lost her husband and their son was born in 2019.
After her husband's death and birth of her son, the petitioner claimed that her in-laws started harassing her and forced her to sign some documents in September 2019 to give her son in adoption to some of their relatives. According to her, the forcible adoption ceremony took place at Patiala and after some time the adoptive parents arrived in India and since then the whereabouts of her son are not known. Interestingly, when she approached the Chandigarh police, her in-laws joined the investigation and promised to restore the child's custody to his mother.
However, later they expressed their inability to do that.