The Delhi High Court has held that the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) cannot avoid its statutory duty by issuing a “support letter” instead of a No Objection Certificate (NOC). The Court clarified that once legal requirements are met, CARA must actively facilitate the process for a child’s relocation abroad.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a plea filed by the adoptive parents of a minor child seeking permission to relocate her to Canada. The child had been adopted under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), and all formal documentation, including a registered adoption deed and verification reports from the District Magistrate, had been completed.
Despite this, CARA issued only a “support letter” in November 2022. Later, the agency marked the relocation application as “rejected” on its portal, citing that the matter related to HAMA adoption. The Canadian adoption agency informed the parents that without a formal NOC, the process could not proceed.
Read also:- Supreme Court Refuses to Halt Contempt Proceedings Against Advocate Over Remarks on Bombay HC Judge
Aggrieved, the parents approached the High Court seeking directions for issuance of an NOC and challenging CARA’s refusal.
Justice Sachin Datta closely examined the Adoption (Amendment) Regulations, 2021, and subsequent 2022 Regulations. The Court noted that these rules clearly cover situations where children adopted under HAMA are to be relocated abroad.
“The language of the Regulations leaves no manner of doubt,” the bench observed, emphasizing that CARA is obligated to act once the District Magistrate’s verification report is received.
The Court rejected CARA’s argument that it lacked jurisdiction over HAMA adoptions. It held that the regulations explicitly impose responsibilities on CARA even in such cases.
Importantly, the Court clarified that compliance with international requirements under the Hague Convention is not the burden of adoptive parents alone. Instead, CARA must coordinate with authorities in the receiving country.
“The responsibility to ensure compliance with Articles 5 and/or 17 lies with CARA,” the Court said, pointing out that the agency cannot leave families “in the lurch.”
The Court also noted that internal confusion within CARA and communication gaps with Canadian authorities had contributed to the delay.
The central issue before the Court was whether CARA could deny an NOC for relocation of a child adopted under HAMA and instead issue a support letter.
The Court answered this in the negative, holding that such an approach defeats the purpose of the statutory framework and the principle of child welfare.
Allowing the petition, the Delhi High Court directed CARA to actively engage with Canadian authorities and complete the necessary formalities under the Hague Convention.
The bench ordered that:
- CARA must liaise with the receiving country to ensure compliance with required international procedures.
- It must clearly communicate that the adoption is valid under Indian law.
- Upon completion of the process, CARA shall issue a No Objection Certificate to the petitioners.
“The authority cannot abdicate its responsibility,” the Court stated while disposing of the case.
Case Detials
Case Title: Gur Kaur (Minor) & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 16096/2024
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta
Decision Date: 20 April 2026
