Family Law Moot Proposition

BBA.LL.B. - Semester III

Michelle is a 54-year-old single woman who never married in her life till now and is residing
in the Universal States. She is financially very rich and affluent by status and doctor by
profession and is practicing as a Naturopathic Physician in Wall city. She wanted to complete
her family by way of adopting a child from country Indiana. She has visited Indiana many
times for work purpose and medical conferences and was always fascinated by the Indiana
culture. Since then, she wanted to adopt a child specifically from Indiana. While on one visit
attending a medical summit in Denti (Indiana) she got the news from a doctor friend about a
minor girl being rescued by the Denti Police that very morning named Dina whose age was 8
years. Dina was taken to the Government run Shelter and after 6 months was declared as orphan
and considered for adoption. Michelle was moved by the story of Dina and ever since then she
tried to be in contact and take some information from friends or the Government recognised
adoption centre.

The foreign status of Michelle had created number of hurdles for adoption and the Government
centre did not agree to the adoption application given by her for 2 years. Dina was not adopted
by any Indiana parent during the period. As Michelle was still interested in the adoption of
Dina, she was then considered for Inter-Country adoption by the Child Welfare Committee at
Indiana and completed all the documentary formalities required for her to approach for
adoption of Dina. Thus, for further procedures of adoption, the Michelle claimed the Court of
Law to entitle her as a legal guardian of Dina. She pleaded the Trial Court of Denti for the legal
adoption of Dina. But the Court referring the procedure for guidelines Inter-Country Adoption
from Indiana, 2006 in Para 4.1 of Chapter – IV a single person is entitled to adoption only when
she is on or below 45 years of age. Thus, the appellant (Michelle) being a 54-year-old single
woman and the Court observed that there was a huge gap of age difference between the child
and the appellant. Taking all these circumstances into account the Trial Court of De nti dated
17 th of January 2022 denied her pleading under Sec. 7 and Sec. 26 of the Guardians and Ward
Act, 1890.

The order of the Trial Court was challenged at the Hon’ble High Court of Denti, there the
Hon’ble court viewed the No Objection Certificate which was issued by the Central Adoption
Resource Authority(CARA) dated 3 rd of February 2022. The Hon’ble High Court also cleared
that the rules mentioned in Para 4.1 of the procedures to guidelines of Indian Adoption, 2006
age directed that any one of parents should not exceed 55 years refers solely to the married
persons and not to the single. Thus, even on the ground of relaxation on the basis of No Object
Certificate, the Court was not satisfied and prohibited the adoption of an Indian a child dated
9 th of July 2022 stating that the appellant’s age is more than 45 years. Michelle has now
approached the Supreme Court of Indiana under Special Leave Petition which is listed for
hearing on August 2, 2023.

Issues

1. Whether the amendments to the procedure for Guidelines of Indiana Adoption

2011 with s. 41 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
entitle the appellant with the right to adoption of an Indiana orphan child ?
2. Whether Michelle be appointed as a legal guardian for an Indiana orphan child
and take the child abroad (Universal States) under S. 7 and S. 26 of the
Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 as per the made amendments ?
3. Whether the NOC issued by CARA be considered for the current adoption ?

The laws of Indiana and the Constitution of Indiana are pari materia to the laws of India.