The Bombay High Court has held that a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) cannot exercise jurisdiction over a child who does not fall within the category of a “child in need of care and protection”, including a child who is neither orphaned nor abandoned.
A Division Bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Nivedita P. Mehta made the observation while setting aside anorphan
order passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Chandrapur, which had taken custody of a minor child from the petitioners, who claimed to be the child’s adoptive parents, and handed the child back to the biological parents.
The petitioners challenged the CWC’s May 25, 2026 order. They submitted that the biological parents had voluntarily given their third child in adoption to them and that an adoption ceremony was performed at a temple in April 2026. Following the ceremony, the parties executed an adoption deed which was notarised.
The State opposed the petition, contending that the child had been handed over to the petitioners without following the procedure prescribed under law.
The High Court examined the adoption deed and interacted with both the biological parents and the petitioners. The biological parents confirmed that they had voluntarily given the child in adoption.
However, the Court found that the adoption deed had not been registered and held that mere notarisation of the document was insufficient to constitute a valid adoption.
The Court noted that the petitioners failed to adopt the child legally, as a notarized adoption deed is not a valid substitute for official registration.
The Bench further noted that the procedure prescribed under the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) framework, which has statutory recognition under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, had not been followed. However, the Court distinguished the legality of the adoption from the CWC’s jurisdiction over the child.
Referring to Chapter V of the 2015 Act, the Bench observed that a CWC is empowered to exercise its statutory powers only in relation to a “child in need of care and protection” as defined under Section 2(14) of the Act.
The Court held that merely because the prescribed adoption procedure had not been followed, the child did not automatically fall within the category of a child in need of care and protection.
The Court stated that because the child does not require care and protection, the CWC lacked jurisdiction to take custody or order the child returned to the biological parents. It added that the CWC has no authority over children who are neither abandoned nor orphaned.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the criminal writ petition, quashed the CWC’s May 25, 2026 order and directed the biological parents to hand over custody of the child to the petitioners.
The post Bombay High Court: CWC cannot take custody of Child who is neither orphan nor abandoned appeared first on India Legal.