- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre In PIL Seeking Uniformity in 'Adoption And Guardianship' Guidelines
Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre In PIL Seeking Uniformity in 'Adoption And Guardianship' Guidelines The Supreme Court of India (SC) has issued notice to the Centre in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate and BJP Leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay (Petitioner) for seeking uniformity in the grounds of adoption and guardianship for all citizens of India. A three-Judge Bench of...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre In PIL Seeking Uniformity in 'Adoption And Guardianship' Guidelines
The Supreme Court of India (SC) has issued notice to the Centre in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate and BJP Leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay (Petitioner) for seeking uniformity in the grounds of adoption and guardianship for all citizens of India.
A three-Judge Bench of the SC comprising of CJI SA Bobde, Justices AS Bopanna, and Ramasubramanian issued the direction to the Centre while hearing a PIL filed for seeking directions for removal of anomalies on the grounds of 'adoption and guardianship' and ensuring uniformity among all citizens of India without any discrimination.
The PIL stated that there should be no discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth in cases of adoption and guardianship, according to Articles 14, 15, 21, 44 of the Constitution of India and as per several other international conventions.
The petitioner urged that the Top Court being the custodian of the Constitution and protector of the fundamental rights should declare that the discriminatory grounds of 'adoption and guardianship' are violative of Articles 14, 15, 21 of the Constitution.
The petitioner also requested the SC for issuance of directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report on Uniform Grounds of Adoption & Guardianship in the spirit of Articles 14, 15, 21, 44 within three months, while considering the international conventions and the best practices of laws of adoption and guardianship.
The plea further stated that India is a sovereign, socialist secular, democratic republic and the Constitution has well-expressed provisions ensuring the citizens' Equality, Liberty, and Justice, the State has failed to provide uniform grounds of adoption and guardianship for all citizens.
It was emphasized that adoption and guardianship are crucial elements of a person's life, complex. Hence, the cumbersome procedure of it that is neither gender nor religion neutral cause great injury to the public. It stated that uniformity is essential to secure fraternity, equality, and dignity of a child and the State has failed to take steps in this regard to date.
The petitioner mentioned that an Adopted child has the right to inherit property under Hindu law and become a legal heir however it is not the same for an adopted child under the Muslim, Christian, and Parsi law.
It was further emphasized that the personal laws governing marriage and secular activities that include maintenance guardianship, adoption, succession, and inheritance are against the spirit of the Constitution.
The petitioner stated that adoption-guardianship is pivotal as they are directly related to and affect the mental health and psychological well-being of the adopted child. Hence, there is a need to have Uniform Adoption and Guardianship laws to strengthen the constitutional spirit.