Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay high court has ordered an immediate restoration of custody of a minor girl to a Chandrapur couple, ruling that the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) acted illegally by taking charge of a child who was neither orphaned nor abandoned, despite allegations surrounding an irregular adoption process.A division bench comprising Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta quashed the CWC’s orders of May 27 and June 5, 2026, and allowed a habeas corpus petition filed by a Chandrapur couple.The case stemmed from the adoption of a girl child born to a Gadchiroli-based farming family in Nov 2020. The biological parents, who already had three children, voluntarily agreed to give one of their twin daughters in adoption to the childless couple. Both families subsequently executed a notarised adoption deed under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA).The HC noted that the deed was not registered and that the statutory procedure prescribed under the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) guidelines and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, was not followed.However, the bench held that procedural irregularities in adoption could not empower the CWC to assume custody of the child, as she did not fall within the category of a “child in need of care and protection” under Section 2(14) of the Juvenile Justice Act.“The child before us cannot be termed as ‘orphan’ or ‘abandoned’,” the court observed, adding that the CWC lacked jurisdiction to intervene in such circumstances.Petitioner’s counsel Nihalsingh Rathod contended that the couple cared for the child since she was 6 days old and admitted her to school during the 2024-25 academic session. In May this year, representatives claiming to be associated with an NGO and the CWC visited their residence and sought documents related to the adoption.On June 5, when the couple appeared before CWC, the child was allegedly taken away and kept in institutional custody. The petitioners claimed they were denied further access to her.Opposing the plea, assistant govt pleader Amit Chutke argued that the adoption was illegal and that the petition was not maintainable because the child was under lawful custody of the CWC.Rejecting the argument, the judges relied on its earlier 2024 judgement in Leelendra Deju Shetty versus State of Maharashtra and reiterated that the CWC’s jurisdiction extends only to abandoned, orphaned or vulnerable children requiring care and protection.The bench also cited Supreme Court rulings holding that the welfare of the child remains the paramount consideration in custody disputes.While clarifying that the legality of the adoption could still be examined separately before a competent civil court, the bench held that the CWC’s action in retaining custody of the child was “wrong and illegal”.
